NEW WORLD ORDER: Communism Through the Back Door – video by Dennis Wise

Screen Shot 2016-04-10 at 9.53.07 PM

Four hours, 16 segments.  Amazing, fast-moving explanation for the plight of our world.

Same producer of THE GREATEST STORY NEVER TOLD.

Arthur Topham’s Political Beliefs May Just Be Illegal by Eve Mykytyn

Screen Shot 2015-11-07 at 4.51.44 PM

Arthur Topham’s Political Beliefs May Just Be Illegal
The Extraordinary Trial of Arthur Topham: Part 3
by Eve Mykytyn / November 29th, 2015

On November 12, 2015 Arthur Topham was convicted of inciting hatred against a racial group, the Jewish people. Mr. Topham maintains a website, RadicalPress.com, in which he publishes and comments upon various documents. These documents include The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, various anti-Zionist texts, and a tract entitled Germany Must Perish!, first published in 1941 and then satirized by Mr. Topham as Israel Must Perish!.

Mr. Topham’s defense rested primarily on the theory that his writing was not directed at Jews as a race or religion, but rather at the politics espoused by a number of Jewish people. The best discussion of this topic is by Gilad Atzmon, contained in his book, The Wandering Who?. The basic take away for considering the implications of Mr. Topham’s criminal conviction is that some people conflate Judaism as a religion, an ethnic heritage AND with a political view, not always consistent, that generally favors Israel’s perceived benefit.

Canada has a lobby entitled Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) that lobbies the Canadian government on behalf of Israel. Mr. Rudner, who had lodged various complaints about Mr. Topham in the past and was the Crown’s expert in Mr. Topham’s case, has worked for CIJA or its predecessor for 15 years. So the Crown relied upon the testimony of a man who lobbies for Israel (clearly a political entity) for proof of anti Semitic content and potential harm to Jewish people. His appearance in tiny Quesnel is testimony to the political importance that his organization places on silencing Mr. Topham. (The original witness scheduled to testify, Mr. Farber was a former colleague of Rudner’s, and apparently the two are close enough that Mr. Rudner’s written testimony was an exact duplicate of Mr. Farber’s original.)

Since Mr. Topham was accused of anti-Semitism, let’s look at the term. The quote below is from the Holocaust Encyclopedia, published and maintained by the United States Holocaust Museum so it is probably safe to assume that this is a standard definition.

“The word antisemitism means prejudice against or hatred of Jews. The Holocaust, the state-sponsored persecution and murder of European Jews by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945, is history’s most extreme example of antisemitism. In 1879, German journalist Wilhelm Marr originated the term antisemitism, denoting the hatred of Jews, and also hatred of various liberal, cosmopolitan, and international political trends of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries often associated with Jews. The trends under attack included equal civil rights, constitutional democracy, free trade, socialism, finance capitalism, and pacifism.”

Interesting that, in the first paragraph of its section on anti-Semitism, the encyclopedia blends together the concepts of ‘hatred of the Jews’ with opposition to various political and social movements generally associated with Jews. This is puzzling. Is it anti-Semitism to oppose socialism or is it anti-Semitic to oppose finance capitalism? While one could oppose both, it would be impossible to espouse either view without rejecting the other. I assume the author did not intend to imply that opposition to socialism, for instance, was it anti-Semitic even if such opposition was from a fellow Jew.

I bring this up because this is precisely what I believe happened in Mr. Topham’s case. Mr. Topham was charged with two counts of inciting hatred over different periods of time. The jury found him guilty on the first count and not guilty on the second. Of course there are many possible explanations for a split verdict (none of which the jury is allowed to discuss even after trial without committing what the judge termed a ‘criminal’ offense). The observers, including myself, tended to believe that the discrepancy in the verdicts was a result of the text Germany Must Perish! and its satirization by Mr. Topham in Israel Must Perish!, a text that appeared on his website during the period for which Mr. Topham was found guilty.

The original text of Germany Must Perish! was written in 1941 by Theodore Kaufman, an American Jewish man. The text was originally self-published, but was apparently advertised and reviewed by the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and Time magazine. In any case, the publication was well known enough to have been read in Germany and was cited by Hitler and Goebbels as evidence of the bad intention of the Jews. The book is horrendous. Its semi-literate ravings are a ridiculous indictment of the German people and their warlike nature. Kaufman advocates sterilization of the Germans as the only possible remedy. At best, the author is confusing all Germans with Nazis, but that is not what the book says. Mr. Topham’s satire in which he substitutes the words ‘Israel’ for Germany and ‘Zionists’ for Germans helps to make the original text comprehensible. The satire hopefully provides some insight into how these words might have been viewed by Germans in 1941. The proof that the works were effective but the satire was not understood, is that Mr. Topham faced criminal charges for aping Kaufman’s words.

In its case, the Crown made the point that Israel Must Perish! was a horrible text. The Crown argued that the fact that the words were originally written by a Jewish man to indict the Germans did not kosher the text. “Jews,” the Crown said, “could write anti-Semitic things too.” Presumably her next case will be against a Jew for inciting hatred against the Jewish people. Mr. Topham was making a political point. I believe he was trying to convey the idea that Israel and Zionists could seem very much like Germans and Nazism in 1941. It is not necessary to agree with Mr. Topham’s point to understand it.

If I am right and it was this text that caused Mr. Topham’s conviction, then that is an important indictment against Canada’s admirable attempts to limit ‘hate’ speech while allowing freedom of political speech. Mr. Topham’s criminal conviction may well have been the result of a misunderstanding that Mr. Topham was criticizing Israel and Zionism and not Jews as a race. Germany and Israel are political constructs, Germans may not be, but Zionists, or those who support establishment of the state of Israel are, by definition, espousing a political cause. So, Mr. Topham criticized the political cause of the Zionists. Is there a way in which Canada’s laws would allow Mr. Topham’s political views to find an outlet? Perhaps Canada ought to make criticism of Israel legally off limits so that Canadians may adjust their behavior accordingly.

Read Part 1 and 2.
Eve Mykytyn graduated from Boston University School of Law and was admitted to bar of the state of New York. Read other articles by Eve.

Article Source

Interview with Joseph Hickey of the Ontario Civil Liberties Association by Ezra Levant on Arthur Topham’s Sec. 319(2) criminal case

ATEditorPic185

Editor’s Note: Only recently did I learn that Joseph Hickey, Director of the Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) had been interviewed by former SunNews television personality Ezra Levant on his show “The Source” after the OCLA came out in defence of my criminal charges brought forth by the actions of B’nai Brith Canada, Israel’s principal lobby group operating within our country.

Screen Shot 2015-09-26 at 10.58.56 AM

True to Zionist form Ezra Levant introduces the topic of discussion by making false, misleading pronouncements about myself (calling me “anti-Semitic” and implying that my website RadicalPress.com is guilty of publishing “Hatred” toward the Jews and then also suggests that Joseph Hickey undoubtedly would agree with him [he doesn’t]) but then moves into a discussion with Mr. Hickey about why his organization volunteered to come to my support.

Mr. Hickey’s position with respect to Canada’s so-called “Hate Speech” laws is clear and unequivocal: he doesn’t feel that such legislation is required in a free and democratic society.

Again, one other example of the Zionist media monopoly’s misfeasance and disinformation propaganda occurs in the video when Levant shows an image of the digital “book” cover that I created for my satire on Theodore Kaufman’s actual book “Germany Must Perish!” and portrays it to the viewing audience as if it were an actual book. Of course he conveniently overlooks mentioning the real book that was written by a real Jew back in 1941 and thus conveys a false image of my work and my website.

Screen Shot 2015-09-26 at 11.00.03 AM

This video is well worth viewing and sharing with others as it clearly shows how the Zionist media functions in order to suppress free expression and vilify those who exercise it but more importantly it also shows that there is a strong and growing support for the repeal of these Zionist created “hate crime” laws in the form of civil liberty associations such as the OCLA.

I wish to acknowledge Joseph Hickey’s stand on this vital issue and thank him (belatedly) for having presented his positive position in a clear and understandable fashion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_MxPOUzZuw&feature=youtu.be

••••  ••••

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

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

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

NDP purge of pro-Palestine candidates plays into Harper’s hands By Justin Podur

DNP purge

https://ricochet.media/en/562/ndp-purge-of-pro-palestine-candidates-plays-into-harpers-hands

NDP purge of pro-Palestine candidates plays into Harper’s hands

By

Justin Podur

[Editor’s Note: All graphics furnished by RadicalPress.com] 

The Conservative Party is on the hunt, and with the help of the NDP and Liberals, they are cleansing Canadian politics of anyone who might think of Palestinians as human beings.

In the first weeks of the election campaign, two NDP politicians have had to distance themselves from statements about facts that are utterly obvious to anyone who knows Israel/Palestine, one nominated candidate has had to resign, and many more NDP members have been blocked by the party from seeking nominations to run for office.

Quebec NDP candidate Hans Marotte expressed past support for the first Palestinian intifada, a mass movement against Israel’s occupation to which Israel responded with the “broken bones” policy of violent repression. When the Conservatives dug up his comments, Marotte said it was proof they couldn’t find anything more recent. He didn’t recant, but he was effectively silenced.

Ontario NDP candidate Matthew Rowlinson had to issue a statement apologizing for signing an “incendiary and inaccurate” letter that included the documented and provable claim that ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is ongoing in Jerusalem. The “inaccurate” part of the letter said that Israel seeks a Jerusalem free of Palestinians. As for “incendiary,” we would do better to look at some of the weapons Israel deploys against Palestinians — more on that to come.

The tortured language of this reply to disgruntled supporters is a consequence of muddled thinking.
Screen Shot 2014-07-28 at 11.06.52 AM copy

Then there are those who have been dumped by the party. Nova Scotia NDP candidate Morgan Wheeldon had to resign for calling Israel’s 2014 attack on Gaza, which killed more than 2,200 people including more than 500 children, a war crime. NDP member Syed Hyder Ali, who had wanted to run in Edmonton, was told to withdraw his name — because he also said that Israel was guilty of war crimes. Jerry Natanine of Nunavut, the mayor of Clyde River, was tossed because, in his words, “I often side with the Palestinians because of all the hardship they are facing and because nothing is being re-built over there.”

Out of date, out of touch

Those who wrote to the party about Morgan Wheeldon’s forced resignation were treated to an incredibly out-of-date, out-of-touch email response, in which Wheeldon was accused of “minimiz[ing] the horror of violence targeting civilians,” which is “unacceptable and contrary to NDP policy, which condemns terrorism.” The party reply also repeats that the NDP supports “a two-state solution that would see Palestinians and Israelis living side by side in independent states.”

The tortured language of this reply to disgruntled supporters is a consequence of muddled thinking. In 2014, it was very clear that the monstrously outmatched Palestinian fighters were focused on military targets. Of 72 Israeli casualties, 66 were soldiers. The “horror of violence targeting civilians” was experienced mainly by Palestinians. Is the NDP saying that what Israel is doing to Palestinian civilians can be justified by “terrorism,” which presumably refers to the use of rockets by Palestinians (and not the use of heavy artillery and bombs by Israel)?

He should be clear that these circumstances include the high-tech slaughter of children.

NDP policy is at least a decade out of date. No one in Israel is interested in a two-state solution or a peace process. Israel took a decision just over a decade ago to “freeze” the peace process. Since then, Israel’s war against the Palestinians has continuously expanded, with attacks on Gaza’s trapped, defenceless population in 2006, 2008-2009, 2012, and 2014.

To be fair, Wheeldon’s Facebook posts, which mentioned the bombings of buses by Hamas, were also a decade out of date. The last bus bombing by Hamas was around 2005, and in the ten years since, the organization — labeled “terrorist” by all parties in Canada — has focused increasingly on confronting the vastly more powerful Israeli military, while that military has focused its incredible firepower on Palestinian civilians. It may also be worth mentioning that Hamas has been fighting against ISIS in Gaza, and has lost lives doing so, while there is de facto collaboration between Israel and al-Qaeda in Syria, as Asa Winstanley and others have reported.

Infanticide

The NDP’s response reveals that it does not understand Israel/Palestine today. How might the NDP go about gaining such an understanding?

There is Amnesty International and Forensic Architecture’s Gaza Platform, which has data on every bomb and shell that Israel launched into Gaza in its 2014 attack. It reveals a pattern of attack that is hard to explain in any way except as the targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure. It was built as an accountability tool, in the hopes that justice will eventually be done, and that those responsible for the deaths of thousands of civilians, the destruction of thousands of homes, and the deliberate targeting of hospitals, schools, medical personnel, and UN facilities will face some kind of legal consequences.

Don'tKilltheChildren copy 8

There are statistics, like the fact that infant mortality in Gaza has risen for the first time in 50 years, thanks to Israel’s siege on the territory it has attacked three times in the past six years. Or the fact that life expectancy for Palestinians is 10 years shorter than for Israelis. Or the fact that Israel decided almost a decade ago, explicitly, to limit the number of calories available to people in Gaza — to “put them on a diet.”

Only one side, the Israeli side, controls every detail of every Palestinian life in Gaza and the West Bank.

There is Mads Gilbert’s new book, Night in Gaza, in which the Norwegian doctor who has spent many years visiting Gaza describes the 2014 attack as the worst he’s seen. The book shows pictures of the heroic medics and doctors who try to save lives and treat injuries as Israel tests new kinds of shrapnel on Gaza’s children. Gilbert describes what he saw as “infanticide.” He notes that, with a median age of 18, more than half of Gaza’s 1.5 million people are children. Those children are not allowed to leave — they are sealed in behind a wall on three sides and a navy patrolling the sea on the other. Israel has imprisoned them. Gaza, notes Gilbert, is not just a prison, but a child prison.

When Mulcair says, as he did in 2008, that he is “an ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and circumstances,” he should be clear that these circumstances include the high-tech slaughter of children, the imprisonment of children, the imposition of of caloric intake formulas for children, and increased infant mortality and reduced life expectancy. By a matter of simple logic, these are all things that Thomas Mulcair supports.

Destruction

There is Max Blumenthal’s book, The 51 Day War, with its harrowing tales of Palestinians people herded by Israeli soldiers at gunpoint into a house and forced to stay there in the house at gunpoint until the house is bombed and dozens of people are killed.

There is also Harvard economist Sara Roy’s article, which includes a quote summarizing Israel’s approach to Gaza: “No development, no prosperity, no humanitarian crisis.”

Then there is the Israeli side, for which the required reading is Breaking the Silence’s report, “This is How We Fought in Gaza.” It includes testimonies from Israeli soldiers about what they did in Gaza last year. Every single one of them — and there are 111 — is shocking in some way. Choose a few at random. Maybe read about the soldiers’ songs, like “Palestinians only sing the chorus as they have no verses (houses) left” (testimony 1). Or read about the targeting protocols, about how decisions to fire on buildings were made (testimony 51):

“Throughout the entire operation there was a sort of building far away near the coastline… it wasn’t a threat to us, it had nothing to do with anybody, it wasn’t part of the operation… but that building was painted orange, and that orange drove my eyes crazy the entire time. I’m the tank gunner, I control all the weapons systems … So I told my platoon commander ‘I want to fire at that orange house’, and he told me: ‘Cool, whatever you feel like’, and we fired.”

It is playing the right’s game, which it can’t win.

After a few testimonies, readers can take a break and watch a video of Israeli protesters chanting another song outside the hospital of a Palestinian hunger striker: “Why is there no studying in Gaza? Because they have no children left!” Spend some time looking at some terrifying tweets from last year by teenagers taking selfies with captions including “Death to the Arabs.”

Remember that Israeli newspapers are running columns with headlines like “When Genocide is Permissible,” and Israeli politicians call Palestinian children “little snakes.” And anyone thinking that indifference to civilian lives or hateful, racist, and genocidal beliefs are common to both sides might remember that only one side, the Israeli side, controls every detail of every Palestinian life in Gaza and the West Bank, from where they can and can’t go to their very caloric intake.

Playing the right’s game

Israel is heading in an ever-more genocidal direction towards the Palestinians. Support for this move is only possible for those who give up any pretence of anti-racism, universal human rights, anti-militarism, and democracy. It is only possible, in other words, on the right side of the political spectrum.

1_boycott-israel-campaign_2006_50_70_amer-shomali-basel-nasr1 copy 2

On the other side of the spectrum, the pro-Palestine movement and Palestinian civil society are working on a rights-based, not a solutions-based, framework, and are working towards boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS). Many Canadian politicians have heard of the BDS movement, at least for long enough to denounce it. Mulcair, for example, has said that he finds BDS “grossly unacceptable,” as one might expect of someone who ardently supports Israel in every situation and circumstance.

If the progressive position supporting BDS is grossly unacceptable, perhaps Mulcair might find more acceptable Hamas’s conditions for a 10-year truce with Israel: an end to the siege of Gaza and the opening of a seaport, an airport, and the land crossing into Egypt. This is actually far short of the NDP’s quaint espousal of a two-state solution, since the occupation would continue. But all the same, for the NDP to call for the opening of Gaza and the freeing of 750,000 children from prison in today’s context would be politically significant indeed. It won’t happen for exactly that reason.

These may be the evil political calculations that have to be made in order to succeed electorally. But here is something to consider. If the NDP purges the progressive, pro-Palestine voices from its party out of fear of supporters of Israel’s ever-escalating violence against the Palestinians, it is playing the right’s game, which it can’t win. Israel’s national politics, which has drifted so far to the right that to call someone a leftist is an insult (and “punch a lefty, save the homeland” and “good night, left side” are slogans chanted at pro-war demonstrations), could teach the NDP something about how this works. There, too, left and liberal parties spent the past few elections trying to pander to centre-right sentiment, and have basically disappeared as a political force.

The NDP’s purge of pro-Palestine candidates can only help Stephen Harper, who doesn’t talk nonsense about a two-state solution but simply and openly supports whatever Israel wants and is doing. Those who want that will vote for Harper, not the NDP.

GazaUprising copy 3

Meanwhile, if voters want to cast their ballot this October for a major Canadian party that believes that Palestinians are human beings too, they can’t.

——

About the author

Justin Podur is an activist and writer based in Toronto, and the author of Haiti’s New Dictatorship.

 

Alex Jones debates Dr. David Duke – Full Interview

JonesvDuke

RPEdNew300 copy

Dear Reader,

This debate by the controlled Alternative Alex Jones and the free and open Dr. David Duke is likely one of the most important discussions that the Internet community has witnessed ever and sums up in no uncertain terms the depth of the deception that has been created by the Zionist Jewish power elite.

It’s absolutely essential that anyone interested in the Jewish Question watched this debate to the end. Alex Jones has, from what I’ve learned, now removed this debate from his website due to its incriminating effect upon his now exposed agenda of always trying to cover up the major role that the Zionist Jews have played throughout the 20th Century and the 21st.

Please watch it and pass it along to anyone who may still be confused about who is running the world at this point in our history.

•••• ••••

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

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

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

THE ZUNDEL TRIAL & FREE SPEECH By Douglas Christie, B.A., L.L.B.

 

ZundelTrial&FreeSpeechDC800

THE ZUNDEL TRIAL & FREE SPEECH
By Douglas Christie, B.A., L.L.B.
February 25, 1985

dchristie2

DOUGLAS CHRISTIE, B.A., L.L.B.
__________________________________________________________

[EDITOR’S NOTE: In the Introduction to this small booklet published by C-FAR back in 1985, then President of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, Daryl Reside, wrote:

“In this booklet, C-FAR’s Canadian Issues Series is publishing excerpts from defence lawyer Doug Christie’s spirited summation to the jury at the Ernst Zundel trial. This summation was delivered February 25, 1985.

Zundel had been charged under Section 177 of the Criminal Code for having knowingly published false news that was likely to be injurious to the public good. In his ringing defence, Christie seeks to establish: 1) that credible reasons existed for much of what Zundel published; that is, he had justification and arguments for his point of view; 2) that he sincerely believed what he wrote and, therefore, did not knowingly publish falsehoods; and 3) that  a diversity of opinions, however controversial they may be, is vital to a democracy and in no way harms the public good. Threading its way throughout the entire summation is Christie’s passionate view that, right or wrong, a man must be permitted to search for the truth and express his point of view.

It is this fierce commitment to principle and to liberty that makes this summation an important historical document…. It should also be noted that Zundel nowhere advocated illegal or violent actions in the two pamphlets in which he was accused of violating Section 177.”

It is now going on 25 years, a quarter of a century, since Doug Christie gave this summation to the jury in February of 1985. In the interim period the forces of censorship and repression have been successful in punishing Ernst Zundel to the max and he now sits in a dungeon in Zionist-occupied Germany and has been jailed for over six years already for having committed the gravest crime of the 20th Century: Speaking the truth.

Obviously the battle to end censorship is far from over. In my own case with these same Zionist Jew forces working through B’nai Brith Canada’s League for “Human Rights”, we see their relentless and calculated designs continuing to unfold before the public’s now awakening eyes. The war for freedom of speech continues.]

DOUG CHRISTIE’S SUMMATION TO THE JURY IN 1985

ErnstZVictim

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it’s my role as counsel, to address you now and speak to you about the position of the defence. My first observation is that probably never before in the history of your country, have twelve people had to grapple with a more all-encompassing and serious issue than you will have to deal with. When you have finished your deliberations, in all probability your country will be made different, for as long as you and I will live, by the decision that you will make here about the most serious issues that confront any citizen in a free society.

You have spent seven weeks examining the evidence in one of the most wide-scoped cases in the history of Canadian jurisprudence. I said at the beginning, and I repeat to you now, that this is a case that should never have been before a court of law in a free society because it is an issue upon which courts will have no end of difficulty in addressing and dealing with. If you have a clear understanding of the role of freedom in a free society, this may never have to happen again, because a clear indication that we permit and tolerate debate and points of view we may not agree with from a jury of twelve ordinary citizens will be the strongest indication to every politician in this country that we are not subject to the pressures of groups dictating ideas and determining how other people will think, act, and speak.

I suggest to you now that what you have heard in these seven weeks is a lot more information on the subject of the book, Did Six Million Really Die?, than you or I might ever have thought at first was likely to occur. I suggest that we have all learned something in this process. Tolerance, is indeed, one of the things that you have learned by hearing another side to a point that we always thought was so clear and so simple. But to everything we know in life, there are two sides, and many more quite often, and nobody, no matter how well informed or how expert, has all the truth, or ever will.

 

tazebook_dees-1 copy

It shouldn’t be for the law to determine the extent of debate in a free society. It shouldn’t be forced upon judges and courts to decide what is the truth about some historical belief. It’s nobody’s fault in this room that we are here. It is the duty of every one of us to do our duty as we are, lawyers, judges, jurors, but really it was a wrong political decision to bring before you and me the duty to examine history 40 years old to determine where the truth lies. It is a question that never should have been here. But having been placed in this position, we must deal with it, and we must deal with it to preserve important values in our society.

The first and most important value is the freedom to debate, the freedom to think, the freedom to speak and the freedom to disagree. This prosecution, has already had a very serious effect on those freedoms. If it were to result in a conviction, I suggest to you that a process of witch-hunting would begin in our society where everyone who had a grievance against anyone else would say “Uh-huh, you are false, and I’ll take you or pressure somebody else to take you to court and force you to defend yourself.” Even though our society says, as it always has, in this and every other charge, the burden’s on the Crown, the burden to prove every ingredient is on the Crown, the burden to prove that the thing is false is on the Crown, where does the accused stand? He’s here. He’s been here like you, at his own expense for seven weeks and whatever may become of this case, he’s already paid a very high price for the belief that he had the right to speak what he believed to be the truth.

Who could deny that he believed it to be the truth? In fact, who can prove it wasn’t the truth? If this society cherishes freedom, as men and women in the past have, then you and I must very clearly state that truth can stand on its own. In a free society we have no better protection, for my opinion and yours, than that you should be free to express yourself and I should be free to express myself, and no court need decide who’s right and who’s wrong.

Is that going to be a danger to you and me? Error, if there is such, in my opinion or yours is best determined when you and I talk freely to one another, and you and I can then debate and hear from each other many sources of information which couldn’t be produced in a court of law. How many of our opinions could stand up to seven weeks of scrutiny? How much of anything you have ever written or I’ve ever written could be analyzed line by line for seven weeks, phrase by phrase, with experts from all over the world, and found to be true? There will be errors in anything you or I believe, and thank God for it. We are, none of us, perfect. But in the thesis Did Six Million Really Die? there is a substantial point of view, a reasonable argument found upon fact, that many will reject, but many are free to reject. Who denies Dr. Hilberg the right to publish his views? Who denies that he should be free to say there was a Hitler order to exterminate Jews? Not my client; not me; nobody in society denies him that right. Who denies anyone the right to publish their views? Well, it’s the position of my client that he’s obliged to justify his publication. And I suggest he has.

I’d like to refer to something Dr. Hilberg said in his book, and I asked him about it. He said, “Basically, we are dealing with two of Hitler’s decisions. One order was given in the spring of 1941, during the planning of the invasion of the U.S.S.R.; it provided that small units of the S.S. and police be dispatched to Soviet territory, where they were to move from town to town to kill all Jewish inhabitants on the spot. This method may be called the “mobile killing operations.” Shortly after the mobile operations had begun in the occupied Soviet territories, Hitler handed down his second order. That decision doomed the rest of European Jewry. Unlike the Russian Jews, who were overtaken by mobile units, the Jewish population of Central, Western, and South Eastern Europe was transported to killing centres.”

Through all the trial and all the arguments and all the discussion, I have yet to see one single piece of evidence of either of those two Hitler orders. If they exist, why can’t we see them? No footnote, no identification of source. We have a statement of very significant fact, without a single supporting document here in that book, or there on that stand from a learned and distinguished author.

Am I saying he has no right to his views? Of course not. Am I saying that I should be able to debate his views and disagree with his views? I certainly suggest that ought to be your right, my right, and the right of every thinking person. You see, there is an example. If I were to put Dr. Hilberg or any other person in the position of the accused and say, “All right, justify that,” how would he? We all hold opinions that at times we would have a difficult job justifying. But, so what? Is it not possible for people to disagree and be free to disagree when they themselves are not absolutely certain they’re right? Have we come to the stage in society where tolerance is so limited that we must prosecute those whose views we find disagreeable?

In this trial, I often wondered and I suggest, so should you, why all this. Why? For a little booklet that published a point of view which some people reject and other people believe? Why? Well, only in the last few hours of this trial did I really begin to see the reason why. It had nothing to do with Did Six Million Really Die?; very little to do with The West, War and Islam, a lot to do with Mr. Zundel and his views. Was he a racist? Was he a lover of Hitler? Was he perhaps a neo-Nazi, as so often we’ve been told? What difference would that really make anyway? If it was alleged that he had some views of a Communist nature, so what? We tolerate those views. In a newsletter complaining about what had happened to 2,000 friends and supporters and subscribers of his newsletter, many of them old, when their homes were entered in West Germany, with warrants in the middle of the night, he was angry. So, out of 25 years of his writing letters, they found a sentence which implied some deep anger and the resort to violence. Never once has there been a suggestion of any violence from Mr. Zundel at all. No suggestion he ever owned or had or would have had a gun. None of what is suggested. But you know who he actually quoted and paraphrased? You know it was the man who said, “All legal power comes out of the barrel of a gun.” That was – if you know history – Mao Tse-tung, a man who was eulogized in the Parliament of Canada upon his death. And yet, Mr. Zundel used it, and is cross-examined as to its deep-seated significance, as if he had some sinister intent.

I began to see, as I suggest you should, that the real reason for this prosecution was his views. If any of us is subjected to that kind of scrutiny, it will mean that freedom really ceases to have any meaning. You will be free to agree but not free to disagree. That’s the kind of society which will result if a conviction can be founded upon a prosecution of this kind.

I suggest that you don’t have to believe what it says in Did Six Million Really Die?, but you probably have good reason to. There’s a lot of truth in that pamphlet which deserves to be considered by rational men and women all over the world, not because they’re academics, but because they’re thinking human beings and they want to hear different points of view. What are we, lobotomized idiots, that we only have to accept the point of view of the “majority”? Or are we free, should we be free, to think of views that are not majority views?

How do you think change occurs in society? Do you think the whole of society decides, “Oh, we were wrong about the world being flat,” and all of a sudden, bang, the whole world decides, “Oh, it’s round now.”? Ask Galileo how difficult that was. In his time, he was a heretic, his views were totally contrary to 99% of the population. But, who was right?

Now, change has to occur in everybody’s thinking from time to time. Everybody grows. I’ve learned something here; you’ve learned something here; we’re all growing. And it’s in the process of hearing other points of view that we grow. But if we decide that somebody’s point of view ought not to be heard because someone else says it’s false, we’ve terminated all significant discussion, because significant points of view are always regarded as false by somebody, and if they’re controversial, my goodness, they create lots of heat, more heat often than light. So, if we are going to keep our children and grandchildren, and for the future of our country the possibility of progress and the possibility of exchanging ideas in a free society, we’d better respect the rights of others who honestly believe that they are right, even though we many think they’re wrong.

I don’t suggest for one moment that you or I have any right to determine from the evidence before you that Mr. Zundel is wrong. I would say to you that the case is unproven as to falsehood. Unproven. In Scottish law there is guilty, not guilty, or unproven. Well, you don’t have that verdict here, but it’s an interesting point by analogy, because in the case at bar it hasn’t been proven beyond reasonable doubt that there’s anything false about Did Six Million Really Die?, not a word. It’s opinion.

Dr. Hilberg says: “Oh, I think it’s all misquotes and half truth and misconceptions.” That’s his view. I respect his right to his view. But he hasn’t proven any of that. He says, “I’ve read documents for years.” What documents did he produce? I didn’t see any. Who produced documents? Who produced books? Who produced maps? Who produced photographs? The defendant. He comes before you because he believes what he says is the truth and he wants to prove it to you. Why else would he waste a hundred thousand of his dollars and seven weeks of his life? Why do you think that he does all of this? Because he believes in the truth of what he says. He believes in it so passionately because he loves his nation. Is that a sin? He didn’t say he hated anybody. He didn’t say a word against anybody when he was on the stand. He was attacked. He said that he loved his race. He said, “I love my children, but that doesn’t mean I hate other people’s children.” Is there something wrong with that? If our society is to be scrupulous about what other people’s opinions are, who among us will be safe? If I or you were to have to reveal all our opinions on the stand, how many of them could withstand public scrutiny? If the right decision is made here, seven weeks will have been well spent in that never again will someone have to defend his position in a court of law on a statement of opinion.

You don’t have to share all of Mr. Zundel’s opinions. He has a right to his; you have a right to yours. He’s not questioning your right to yours. But there is a power that is questioning his right to his, and you are the only hope for the freedom of citizens to hold views that disagree with others. And if you can’t hold views that disagree in a free society, what is there? There are two things. If you can’t have freedom to disagree, then there’s either violence, or there is silence, neither of which is traditional in our country, neither of which is necessary in the future. Our country has been a peaceful country because we have tolerated points of view with which you and I might not agree, not because we have some hygienic method of extracting and eliminating bad views. That’s never been done before, and it should not be done now, and it should never be done again.

But there is a force in our society that wants that to happen. If there’s a means to stop it from carrying on and creating a situation where everybody has to stand before courts and justify themselves to their neighbours, we must find it.

You twelve people have more power in your hands for good or evil than any other twelve people I have ever met, and thank God for the right that you should be free today to defend freedom tomorrow, to make freedom a real thing. You or I have never really known that kind of power before, because we’ve never been put in this position before. A clear answer from you, without doubt, without fear, without malice, will put an end to a process which, if it continues, will lead us to the destruction of all freedom in society.

In his brochure Did Six Million Really Die?, Ernst Zundel presents a thesis, a thesis that men have paid a very high price for believing. No witness for the Crown needs fear for his job, for his security, for his family, but is that true for the defence? Then, why are the defence witnesses here? They are here because they love the truth and believe in what they say, and already I can tell you that the prices are being paid. So much for freedom in society, that men and women have to fight to get into courtrooms to give their evidence, to testify under fear. Well, with the right decision from you, that fear will be diminished. What little we know as ordinary citizens about communist societies indicates that where there is an official truth, where there is a state religion or belief, people become more and more afraid to speak. That should not happen here. There is what Orwell referred to as an official truth in some societies. Is that what you wish for your society? You will have more power to answer that question today than any other twelve people in our society so far. With a clear answer to that question, you will do some service to your descendants in the preservation of their rights.

I don’t know how many of you have controversial views. Maybe none. But will your children have none? Would you like to have the right to their opinions? That’s a question you too will answer.

The booklet Did Six Million Really Die? is more important for German people than it is maybe for others, because there is a real guilt daily inculcated against German people in the media every time they look at the war. You know most of us are from a background on the Allied side, I think, and so when we have Veteran’s Days, we love our country, we love our people who sacrificed for it. But what of the Germans? Are they always to bear the label of the villains? You see, they had an interest in looking into this question. There are so many people in our society who come from that background who desire to know the truth and don’t believe everything they have been told. They inquire. They have a motive. They indeed have a reason, more than you and I perhaps, to inquire, and their views may be in diametric opposition to yours. But if they have some truth let them tell it. Let them reason. Let the public decide whether they are right or wrong. Let not the courts make a decision. Let not people be forced to justify themselves in this way, but let the public decide. That’s all Mr. Zundel has asked for and that’s all anyone has a right to I suggest and it isn’t too much of a right for anyone to desire.

The German people have been portrayed for forty years in the role of the butchers of six million. Oh, I’m aware that in this case there were repeated efforts to distinguish between Germans and Nazis, but is that really the way they’re portrayed? Is that distinction always kept? Is it justified to believe what we have been told so often? You have heard some reasons which prove that the story of the six million is not correct. Those reasons are given to you by sincere, honest individuals who have done diligent research.

You have heard the evidence of many witnesses and I’d like to briefly capsulize some of the significant things about their evidence. You remember Arnold Freedman. He was transported in cattle cars. He constantly smelled the smoke in Birkenau and saw it belching from chimneys. I want you to consider a very significant question which has troubled me. To create belching chimneys, day in and day out, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week for weeks on end, one needs coal or coke, large quantities of coal or coke. I’ve heard all the evidence, as you have, of the process of unloading the people into the concentration camps. Why would all those people be unloaded by the helpless prisoners like Dr. Vrba, and the coal be unloaded by the S.S.? Keep in mind, in the days of 1940 to 44, we didn’t have backhoes, right? We didn’t have caterpillars unloading these trucks, coal cars. Everything was apparently done by hand. Well, you know, it makes me very, very interested, to put it mildly, that all this smoke and burning chimneys and flames shooting forth should occur with nobody unloading coke trains. Did you hear anybody talk of unloading coke trains? I didn’t?

To question should never be anti-anything. Why should it be? To think is not against anybody. To reason, to question, is the free right of a thinking human being. So I wonder, where does all this right to think go, if we can’t ask the question: where were the coke trains? Where was the coal?

The evidence of Mr. Zundel was that 80 pounds of coal is necessary to cremate a human body. The amount of coal to turn a human body into ashes is a morbid subject, of course, but it doesn’t change. The laws of physics don’t change for the Germans, for the Nazis, for the Jews, or anybody; they’re all the same, the laws of physics. Now, 80 pounds of coal or coke for 1,765,000 people is nearly a hundred and sixty million pounds of coke. Where does all this come from? Nobody bothers to answer that, but they say that Did Six Million Really Die? is false.

How is that question false? How is questioning anything false? Why should the editorial opinions of our writers be any different than Mr. Zundel’s? How many editorials contain false news every day? How many newspaper stories, how many books, how many movies? What are we doing here? We’re crucifying one man’s opinion because they say he is not a nice man, when every day in all of our society there’s a thousand misquotes, misstatements. Well, what’s the difference? I’ll tell you what the difference is. This man has no political power and big newspapers and big television stations and big radio stations and big politicians do. That’s the difference.

When John Turner quotes Brian Mulroney, do you think he does it to approve of him? Do you think they quote each other out of context because they wish to point out the inconsistencies of their opponent? The Crown, in his analysis, will no doubt say there are statements in Did Six Million Really Die? that are out of context, that the Red Cross did not say there was no extermination when they wrote their report, but it is true they said there was no extermination during the war, when they were in the camps. They don’t even produce for you a shred of evidence of a gas chamber, but they say 1,765,000 people died by going between two buildings. Remember Dr. Vrba’s evidence? Well, how do you accomplish that without a gas chamber? What, do they disappear and they’re all shot? No, you have to justify the claim that millions died; you have to have gas chambers and there’s no evidence to support them.

Now the defence has tried to show that the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz seen today, are impossibilities, scientific impossibilities. We have called evidence, witness after witness, to show they have tried to find the bottom of this story, and they have found nothing that makes sense to their experience. That’s pretty significant stuff. That’s pretty important analysis. Look what Dr. Faurisson has paid for his inquiries. He’s been beaten; he’s been beaten while he talked; he’s been subjected to quite a bit of ridicule; but does anyone deny the sincerity or honesty of his inquiry or his intelligence or his detailed analysis of what documents there are? I suggest not.

bloodyfourisson

Prof. Fourisson – beaten
by Zionist thugs in 1989
__________________________

People want the right to ask these questions, and there are some people who don’t want anyone to have the right to broadcast what they find, and I would consider that, I suggest you should, a very suspicious situation. When any group of people wants to silence an individual, you’d better ask why. Maybe it’s a good thing, maybe it’s beneficial to social tolerance that we should ask these questions. Maybe it’s time to do that now. Maybe the way to peace is not through silence and coercion on these matters but through open discussion. How will that change the world? Maybe it will be a better world when we can look at ourselves more honestly in the cold light of reason rather than the heated passions of a war just ended.

That’s what revisionism is all about. After the First World War, there were many revisionists, many people who said: “Well, we really don’t have all the answers on our side.” We used propaganda. We told people that Germans killed Belgian babies and boiled cadavers to make soap. That’s not a Second World War story at all. If we want peace there must be freedom to discuss whether or not the morality was all on one side. That’s really the social effect of the booklet Did Six Million Really Die?. You don’t have to accept it. To see even that it puts some of the things that happened after the Second World War in a different context, would be a redeeming value in itself, but the booklet has a great deal more. It has truth, a lot of truth. It’s for you to decide, for the public, indeed, too, to decide how much truth, measured, as they ought to, with their right to read everybody else’s opinion.

Error needs the support of government; truth stands on its own. In fact, what is occurring here, is the endeavor to silence one opinion, one side of the argument. “But the world is no more justified in silencing the opinion of one man than that one man would be if he had the power to in silencing all the world,” these words of John Stuart Mill are as true today as when he spoke them. Do we have to learn the same lessons all over again, every generation? Do we never entrench and understand from one generation to the next the right to differ? Do we always have to re-fight these battles time and again? I guess we do. I guess it’s always going to be a struggle to have a different point of view, but I’ll tell you, it has always been the history of Man that good men and women have valued freedom, sometimes to the extent that they would risk their lives to save it, and if anything could be done to honour the memory of men and women who died in war for the sake of freedom, it would be to recognize that freedom now, for someone whose opinions they might not have agreed with. If we have a duty to admit a fact about ourselves, it’s that we don’t have all the answers.

Let our society, from the date of your verdict, be known for the safety with which we tolerate divergent views and opinions, when truth is left free to combat error in the open arena of a free society unfettered by the heavy hand of the state. That is a simple statement of principle. I guess it is necessary for you and I once again to make the little sacrifice that you and I have to be here and fight for that principle all over again. Thank God no one was really hurt. Thank God that we can do this in a rational context with respect for each other, with understanding, with charity for our many errors, without having to go to war, to discuss controversies. Maybe there’s progress, but there won’t be if everybody who wishes to bring forward a controversial view will have to do so in a court at their own expense. If you convict, that process will have only just begun, because in society there will always be people who would like to put their enemy right there in the defendant’s chair. That’s where a lot of people would like to see somebody they disagree with, right there. If you convict, I can say to you that’s a very likely situation. There are some rather nasty politicians who would like to put their opponents right there, and if we follow down the road that this prosecution will lead, if there is a conviction, there will be no stopping those types of politicians who wish to put their opponents right there. Then where will we be? Don’t think that they wouldn’t have the power, because they can find it. There are pressure groups today who can find that power.

The book-burnings by the Nazis were wrong, but what’s going on here? A book’s on trial, two books, if you like, pamphlets, tracts, if like. But every day in our society people say a lot more controversial dubious things than are written there. Why are these people so afraid of such a little book? If it was false, would they be afraid?

You’ve heard a witness, Doug Collins. He’s been a journalist for 35 years, and he says there’s the power of Zionists in the media. Do you really need some proof of that? How many publications today criticize Israel very strenuously? Is that the kind of society you want, where one view is the only legitimate view? The smear word of anti-Semitism is so easy to put upon anyone and so difficult to disabuse oneself of once you are labeled. Is criticism of Israel or the point of view of Jews any more evil than the criticism of Americans or the criticism of British or the criticism of French points of view? Why should it be?

It’s my submission to you, that maybe the basis of the Crown’s attack, is that the accused has chosen to criticize a very obviously Jewish belief. Now, I don’t question the right of any group, Jews, Gentiles, Greeks, whomever, to hold whatever views, but why deny Ernst Zundel the same right? And then let the public decide, as every time they will, between whom they believe and whom they don’t believe.

The future of the right to hold beliefs is at stake because the truth is never self-evident. There’s always going to be a debate about the truth especially in history. How many believed, as I did when I grew up, that Christopher Columbus discovered America? Well, they don’t always agree on that today. But what’s wrong with changes of view? They happen all the time. History is controversy. Today is controversy. Yesterday is controversy and tomorrow will be controversy. But so what? Nobody is going to be able to write the history of the world until God does. I’d suggest that what it amounts to, when you come down to the bottom line of this question, is that people will always differ. The danger is that if silence one point of view, you won’t get a balanced argument.

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

Let’s look at the evidence. Dr. Vrba says he’s an eye-witness. Dr. Vrba had a little problem here. You have plans, you know, submitted by the defence, of crematoria. Now, let’s make sure we understand each other. There certainly were crematoria. But that doesn’t mean there were gas chambers to gas people. But the issue is were 1,765,000 or millions gassed, killed by a systematic plan to do so? There’s no evidence of that. Dr. Vrba gave evidence of burning pits. Well, we know these places were no Sunday picnic. We know these places were unjust. Deprivation is unjust. The Jews suffered terribly, unjustifiably. The Jews were in concentration camps for war reasons and war is not justified, really. We had people in concentration camps here too. They lost a lot. Thank God we didn’t lose the war and couldn’t feed the people in our concentration camps. What would have happened in our country if the Eastern half had collapsed, the governments had collapsed, the railroads had collapsed, the food system had collapsed, the Western half had collapsed, and we had people, Japanese, for example, in concentration camps around Ottawa? Whom would we feed first, our troops or our prisoners? Thank God we didn’t have to answer that question. The Germans did. And they were hanged for answering it the wrong way.

Have you any idea what Germany looked like in 1945? It sure didn’t look like Toronto. And when the Russians came from the east, do you think they were a nice group of fellows as we are told the Allies were? I suggest to you that there is a great deal to be grateful for in this country and one of the greatest things to be grateful for is that we have never faced that kind of desolation, when everything you know, everything you trusted, everyone you believed in, your ideals, your neighbours, your friends, your country, your home, was ruined. I hope you’ll never know a situation like that. But if we are to understand what happened in Germany we cannot ignore these facts.

Did Dr. Hilberg know that? Was he there? No. Who was? Thies Christopherson was there. It’s obvious that this is a question that could only be understood really, by someone who was there. Dr. Barton was in a camp shortly after liberation, and, like many of us who saw the film Nazi Concentration Camps, he no doubt was as horrified as you and I had every right to be, by that scene. That picture Nazi Concentration Camps was put to you for a reason. It was to persuade you that there were millions of dead people. Well, you saw thousands of bodies, thousands of people who died from privation in war. Only once was there a deliberate suggestion of gassing. That was at Dachau, and I have gone into this with detail as much as you could hope to get, I suggest, in a court, to show that now people don’t say that there were gassings at Dachau. So what happened in that situation? Why did the Allies say there were gassings and now they don’t? Well, because of the same hysteria with which we have regarded Auschwitz for 40 years; Auschwitz, where no Allied soldier could go; Auschwitz where the Russians were; Auschwitz where 4 million or 3 million or 2.5 million or 1,765,000 or 1.1 million according to Hilberg or 900,000 according to Reitlinger, were killed? Cremated? Were what?

There are many reasons to say that this book has not been proven false, that’s all. It’s never been our burden to have to prove that it was true because our law has always allowed the reasonable doubt to go to the accused. He’s presumed innocent. This is presumed to be true until they prove the contrary, and I don’t think they’ve proved the contrary. How have they? Ninety percent of the quotations in the book are proven and accepted. Ten percent are unproven. That’s all.

The Malmedy trial took place in Germany shortly after the war. It may not technically be a Nuremberg trial. But do you really think that there is no substance to the suggestion that what took place there by the same allies against the same accused, is going to be different than what they did at Nuremberg?

You also have in evidence that, at Nuremberg, they didn’t even allow the press to talk to the lawyers of the accused, let alone the accused. So, how do we know what happened to them? Well, we know because some of them said so, and when they said so, like Streicher, they struck it out of the record. Don’t want the world to hear somebody complain about us, and we sure don’t want the press to hear what the accused says unless we say the accused can say it. Do you call that freedom? I don’t. I call that the attitude of war and victor’s justice. It works, obviously. The world believes in your cause, but is it necessary that for all eternity nobody should ever think to differ? Can we now look back with a little less passion, a little less contempt for our adversaries? Could we now maybe look at whether they might have had a point or do we have to believe forever they should be damned to silence?

We’ve heard from Dr. Barton that, in 1945, there was no cure for typhus. So, here’s some of those horrible Nazis telling these people in the concentration camps, “If you don’t delouse and typhus breaks out, you are going to be cremated.” That’s the way he interpreted that. There’s a lot of truth to it. If you get typhus, you are liable to die, especially there, in close confines. That is not to say I don’t believe the Jewish people didn’t suffer. I certainly do and so does my client, and so does this booklet. That’s not to say we lack compassion for the suffering of these people. It is to say we are prepared to examine whether there was a plan of deliberate extermination. There’s quite a difference.

If people died from typhus, disease, privation of war, you don’t have a situation that much different than you had in the Boer War, except on a larger scale, or in the American Civil War, where concentration camps for prisoners of war were hell on earth. And that becomes a significant question: why, if there was a plan to exterminate the Jews, was there a delousing program at all? Why were they told that they should delouse, and why were steps taken to provide the means that they could be protected from that disease?

You remember Arnold Friedman’s evidence. He could tell the difference between skinny people and fat people from the colour of the flames. Honest to goodness! Arnold Friedman is the kind of person you would like to know. Nothing do I say against Arnold Friedman, except that it’s a little bit far-fetched to say that you could tell from the colour of the flames, the people being cremated.

I could understand, as a young boy, how the stories would go around the camp, and I could well imagine how terrifying it must have been for a young boy in camp like that. I could understand how, being separated from his parents would be frightening. It would be horrible, beyond our imagination. But I suggest that when people say things like this, we have to understand that when people suffer, they want to communicate their suffering. They justifiably tend to exaggerate a little bit because they want us to understand how horrible it was. There are other reasons to look at the question, not to hurt the survivor’s feelings, but to look at it realistically and say, as this book says, it’s not correct to believe that six million people were exterminated in this way. It’s not correct to believe that you can tell the nationality of a cremated person by flames shooting from a chimney. That is not correct.

I am not wishing to accuses anybody of being a little bit loose with the facts. Let’s realistically consider that that doesn’t make sense. Let’s not make it a crime, anyway, to disbelieve it. All right? Let’s suggest that Mr. Zundel has at least very good reasons for his belief, common sense ones that he wants to believe in. He wants to understand that his people are not guilty of this crime. He has a motive to look at this. He is interested for the sake of his people, but realistically, is he far off the mark when he says, “I doubt that.”?

I am not saying that if even one Jewish person died that that wasn’t a crime. Of course it was, but we are dealing with an accusation of genocide, a book that questions it and the right to question it. That’s all. I am not suggesting for one moment that that minimizes the suffering, justifies the concentration camps, or anything else, but it allows us, I suggest, the right to question even Dr. Vrba, for after all, he too, is not God. If he’s going to tell us these things, under oath, I want to know why. Don’t you? If somebody tells you the whole population of Toronto went between two buildings, and disappeared, are you going to say, “Yes, I believe that. I don’t question that. I must accept that because he is a survivor”? I have reverence for their pain and suffering. I am not beyond understanding for that, but if we are dealing with a factual question, why not ask the question? And when you do ask the question, what do you get for answers? Hysteria, emotion, and appeals to emotions, too, justified as they are. But we are dealing with facts, let’s stick to facts.

Arnold Friedman also said that sick, older people came into his barracks after the selection, and, therefore, were not killed. And then we come to the question of selection. He describes the selection process in referring to selecting professions even among the older people. Now, why would they select professions? To kill the people? What do you care, if you are just killing people? You don’t care whether they are doctors, lawyers, tailors, whatever. You don’t select people by profession for the purpose of killing them, unless it’s lawyers, and then there’s lots of reasons for doing that.

I remember Dennis Urstein. He said, – and this is really, I suggest, where you’ve got to look a little bit skeptically – he said he lost 154 members of his family in the “Holocaust”. I said, “Could you name even 20?” I suggest to you that if any of us say we lost 154 members of our family, it tends to be a little dubious. How many members of your family do you know and how many generations do you go back? I asked him to name 20. He didn’t get there and ended up naming someone who died in the U.S.A. six or seven years ago. What it means is that people, because they suffer, tend to want you to understand their suffering and they sometimes exaggerate, that’s all.

Dennis Urstein was another volunteer witness who spoke of the colour of bodies hauled out of the gas chambers. Now, Dennis Urstein says he hauled the bodies out of Leichenkeller I, which is an underground mortuary, in Krema II. Now, you can see on the plan where that is. It may have been Krema III, he said, but I’ll tell you something. The two, Krema II and Krema III, are identical. No one will deny that. The plans are there. The two, Krema II and Krema III, in Birkenau are identical. They are long underground areas known as Leichenkellers. They are underground, because when typhus broke out, bodies, sometimes three or four hundred bodies, would be there, so that they would not infect the rest of the camp. The colour of those bodies, he described as grayish or green, but you heard Dr. Lindsay say that if someone is asphyxiated with Zyklon B, hydrogen cyanide, his body is brick red. Now, if they were gassed with Zyklon B, why would that not be so?

There is another question that arises out of Urstein’s evidence. The bodies, he said, had no rigor mortis. No rigor mortis. Now, if the bodies were gassed, and then, he seemed to imply, they were washed and thereby were safe. But if hydrogen cyanide is, as I suggested, water soluble, then touching water associated with the bodies means hydrogen-cyanic poisoning. Yet, he survived hauling those many bodies. He alleged the gas chamber was on ground level. Now, if you look at the plans, he is referring to other than the crematoria and he is referring to the Leichenkeller. He says that it’s a closed-in area. That’s underground. If you are hauling bodies, you are not going to forget hauling them upstairs, but he says it was on ground level. I asked him about that several times and he repeated it several times. This is no minor error, because if he could remember hauling bodies upstairs, it would be hard to forget.

Furthermore, he said there were no pillars. Well, look at the plans. If he is talking about Crematorium II or III, and if he is talking about what he says he was talking about, a flat-roofed building, well the crematoria is not flat-roofed. The Leichenkeller is, and it is underground with a very small protuberance above the ground. This is where Vrba got himself into a real problem. This is a man who says he was an eye-witness. We are supposed to examine the evidence and look at what we know of the facts, and see if it conforms. If it doesn’t, there are reasons to doubt it. He says there were no pillars. If you’ll look in the plans, you’ll see in the Leichenkeller massive pillars. He said the ground adjacent to the crematorium was very beautiful, like a retreat. No collection of piles of coke or other fuel to burn large numbers of bodies which allegedly were burned in the crematoria.

Now, the story of the exterminations is that two to three thousand or more bodies a day were handled in these facilities. There has to be an explanation for the figure of 1,765,000 in two years mentioned by Vrba. If there are 80 pounds of coke required for each body, for two thousand bodies (that’s what half of what Krema II is supposed to be handling a day), that’s 160,000 pounds of coke a day.

Let me deal with Dr. Barton for a moment. He presents the truth to the best of his knowledge. He agrees that what’s in this pamphlet was accurate, and that it quoted his article. He was there. He was an eye-witness. In 1945, he was there and he was as brainwashed as everybody else at the time, saying the Germans deliberately intended the killing of these people shown in the movie. He believed all that. And gradually he began to think about it, looked into the kitchen and saw the preparation records for food, and changed his mind. The war involved a little bit more than most people comprehended would be possible in the way of destruction.

It’s my suggestion to you that he treated the subject more scientifically than most people of his time. Just look what happened to him. He dared to say that the Germans didn’t mean to kill all those people, and you know they accuse him now, on public television, as you’ve heard, of killing 15,000 Jews.

What I suggest to you is that when people disagree with the widely held views of their time, they are attacked viciously. He was attacked in the media, in the press and everywhere. Why? What did he do wrong? Well, he dared to say that the Germans were not all bad and the Allies were not all good, and that war itself was the cause of the problem. That’s what he dared to say. He dared to say that the Allies were not all good; the Germans were not all bad; and that war killed people, but not gassing. So, what’s the difference? I suppose the difference is that Dr. Barton was a witness and the accused is the accused. He said there was no treatment for typhus at that time. He thinks essentially, that views should be challenged. He agreed that the average age persons, under conditions of being subject to massive public propaganda, coupled with fears for their families, destruction of their homes, their property, their value system and the desolation of their country, may be brainwashed and make confessions. They would not be able to respond independently of their captors.

Dr. William Brian Lindsay testified that the interpretations of World War II should be looked at by a scientist. The basic problem is the vast number of charges in the readings about the Holocaust. Also, the various authorities have different answers. He said some of the primary sources of information about the Holocaust had been silent for 30 years, during which time history has been written. He looked at all the so-called murder camps in his research. He went to Belzec, Sobibor, Chelmno, Birkenau, Monowitz. He put himself in the position of knowing what the accusations are, and, as a chemist, decided how reasonable the charges are.

In describing the properties of Zyklon B, he discussed the container it came in, the special opener that had to be used, the fact that the gas is lighter than air when it vaporizes, and that the best air would be at the bottom. Now, the Crown said that, well, it’s not very much lighter than air and it would rise slowly and the crystals might have fallen on the ground, enabling people to believe that the gas would come from the ground first. But that wouldn’t explain the fact that the people would stay where the gas crystals were and stay there so they could climb above each other. They were scattered in other areas, but that wasn’t asked by the Crown and that’s why, when Griffiths asked him his questions, and I asked him mine, in the end he said he did not think his opinion had changed.

He refers to the necessity of a venting system. No such thing exists in any of the plans. Look at the plans. That’s because it is a Leichenkeller, a mortuary, not a gas chamber. They want to call it a gas chamber? Then, produce the evidence. Where is it? He concluded that it’s impossible that gassings happened as alleged. For millions to have been gassed in four crematoria, by the method described, 2000 persons crammed into a space of the size alleged, is impossible.

He refers to these spaces that are put forward as gas chambers as unsealed rooms. The difficulties of unsealed rooms in comparison to the American gas chamber, become obvious. A small container of gas is necessary due to the quality of the gas itself. If it were otherwise, chemistry would change from time to time, and from place to place, but it doesn’t. The fact is, that if there is an allegation of this kind, there has to be a real possibility of it having occurred. Otherwise, we are engaged in fantasy.

He has examined the alleged gas chamber at Auschwitz I. There are no doors between gas chamber and the crematoria. Vents are not air-tight. The doors are very very small. The whole thing wouldn’t work. And he comes to that conclusion himself.

Now, he communicated this information to Zundel. So, why shouldn’t Zundel believe him? Why shouldn’t it be credible? Who has done more research into the subject? Who has actually made a study into these gas chambers? I suppose the Crown will answer that by saying, it doesn’t matter. If there are no gas chambers, we will find some other explanation for the six million. What? What was it – shooting, Einstazgruppen, the Stroop report? It doesn’t come to five million, especially when one considers the evidence in reference to the Einsatzgruppen. But we are supposed to believe anyway.

Dr. Lindsay examined the Gerstein statement. He discussed how carbon-monoxide poisoning from a diesel engine is not possible. Yet, that is said to be the method used in Sobibor, Treblinka and others – gas from diesel tank engines, from Russian tank engines. That is the story. Well, if carbon-monoxide is not produced by diesel engines, how is it supposed to be the cause of death? Then, we have the stories of prisoners eating and drinking after handling the dead bodies. It would be suicidal. Shower baths would be abysmal to gas people. What story are we dealing with? The same story we had in Dachau. The gas chambers are showers and the gas comes from the shower heads. Yet, Dachau now has a sign that nobody was ever gassed there. Lindsay fought for the Allies during the war, and I suggest that he is not really to be regarded as one with an axe to grind.

James Keegstra testified primarily to show what happens if you try to question the Holocaust. He is where he is today, not because of his attitude on anything else, but primarily because he dared to say that there’s another view on the Holocaust. That’s when it got picked up by the media. That’s when the ball got rolling. That is when everybody got up in arms. If somebody has an opinion on politics, that’s no problem. But if somebody says anything about the Holocaust, that implies they don’t believe in it, hook, line and sinker, then they are in big trouble.

It’s bad for people who want to discuss it. It is also bad because it denies the possibility to find the truth for everybody. So, there’s a man who’s been a teacher for 21 years, who has been the victim, I suggest, of a massive campaign of vilification because he dared to question.

What a surprising thing! Anybody could be accused of rape, murder, theft or fraud. I’ll bet they wouldn’t suffer the animosity, the hate that occurs to anybody who questions the Holocaust or anybody who is accused of a war crime in the media. Tell me how many murderers have received the publicity against them that Frank Walus got? He hadn’t been tried yet. He was accused of a hideous crime, but it was ridiculous. The man wasn’t even in Poland during the war. He was seventeen years old and he was accused of being an Obergruppenfuhrer during the war, murdering Jews. And eleven witnesses came forward, and said, yes he was, and seven of those said they weren’t even in Poland during the war. That’s justice? Well, that’s not very much different than the atmosphere that prevailed in 1945 and that’s why it is relevant to the issue today, because in this booklet it says Nuremberg was probably rife with prejudice. If the hatred and the prejudice is so great today that that type of thing can happen right now, in Chicago and in the U.S.A., how much greater do you think the pressure was in 1945 for the same result?

This is 40 years later. And who gives Frank Walus anything for what he suffered? Or this man? Even if he is acquitted, who will take care to see that he gets justice, other than maybe an acquittal?

The evidence of Gary Botting is that of an English professor who desired to put forward another view of the Holocaust story. He was presented, or attempted to present, in consideration of the need to tell both sides, the book Hoax of the Twentieth Century [by Arthur Butz]. The Government of Canada decided nobody should read it in Canada. Why? Is it obscene? Take a look at it and ask yourselves this question. Is this society free for people to think, to analyze this question, if a book like that is supposed to be banned and was prevented from being read by students at college level? These are some poor timid human beings in high school as we were told some are, who could be influenced deleteriously by this book. This is college level. They aren’t allowed to have this. Why is that?

It points in another direction than the thesis of the exterminationists. What kind of a country does not permit people to read a book like that? Have a look at it. There’s really nothing abusive in it about anybody. The truth is very clear, that there is a power in this land that doesn’t want you to think about it, doesn’t want anybody out here to think about it, and has made up the mind of somebody in power that anyone who questions this belief will be prosecuted and publicly humiliated. That’s not the kind of country I want nor should any free man or woman want to live in.

Our forefathers fought for the right to be free to think and free to speak. Now, what are we doing here? The sacrifices of those who died for freedom are not respected by this legal proceeding. Gary Botting and others have paid their price for coming here. You can bet on that. Those same forces that will make this man spend seven weeks in that box will make every witness who comes here pay for having done so. You can be sure of that. Anyone who even dares to support this man’s thesis will be labeled. And that’s supposed to be a free society? It’s all very very sad. It may be, if some of those people who are dead, who thought they defended freedom, were alive, we might not be here today.

Gary Botting said it’s a dangerous precedent to do what’s going on here. You know where his father is? He’s buried at Belsen. That’s what he told you. His father. Well, it’s dangerous alright. He dared to write to the Attorney-General to question why he couldn’t read this book or have the students read it. He has no sympathy for the Nazis. His attitude was that people should be free to hear both sides of an issue. No, not in Canada. We are not smart enough even to be able to read that book. We are not supposed to be able to read this book. We are not intelligent enough to decide whether we want to believe this or not.

Is this the way we are supposed to use our brains? The measure of a person’s honest inquiry is whether a person wants to examine alternative sources. Nobody asks them to be government-funded sources, sponsored by anybody. I remember at one point somebody said the research of Dr. Fourisson was not government-funded. So what? You mean to tell me that no one should be believed unless he is on a government subsidy? If Dr. Fourisson pays through his own efforts for his research, is that an indication he is insincere? Or, if someone publishes a book, like Udo Walendy, being a publisher himself, is this to discredit it too? Have we come to the stage of 1984 where, unless it’s published by Big Brother, it isn’t to be believed?

Orwell1984BKCv

I remember the dramatic gesture performed by the Crown when he asked the accused: “Well, who published this? Institute of Historical Review?” Bang. So what? If they are all published by the Institute of Historical Review, so what? Have we come to the point where there is an official sanction on certain publishers? Is it the old argument of don’t look at the contents of the book, just see who publishes it. Well, if that is the case, I suppose the official view of history is already established.

Doug Collins was a soldier during the war. He was captured at Dunkirk. He was in German prisoner of war camps during the war, escaped, was recaptured, escaped and was interned again as far away as Rumania, and went to Bergen-Belsen even before Dr. Barton. One of the things he said about his own experience is, that when he saw the troops coming back, the S.S. released by the Russians, they reminded him of the prisoners in Bergen-Belsen, for their condition. He says Did Six Million Really Die? should be available. There isn’t an abusive line in it. “I have been more abusive in my columns.” He said politicians aren’t entitled to suppress views. This is endemic to all dictatorships.

Doug Collins

DOUG COLLINS – JOURNALIST, FREE SPEECH ADVOCATE
____________________________________________

He talked about Alice in Wonderland being banned in China. I wonder where we are. I remember when the Crown was cross-examining my client on the stand, I almost had to pinch myself to find out if I was really in the country I grew up in, because he was asking him: “Do you believe this? Are you a fascist? Did you write this?” What are we doing here? Is he on trial for his beliefs? Or is he on trial for this being false? Are we living in a free society, or are we not? He said, in the end, I guess, this country likes censorship. I wonder. If you do anything in this world, you will answer that question here. And, indeed, this might be the most powerful thing you will do in your life, certainly the most significant thing. It is a great privilege to practice law, but I don’t think there can be a greater privilege than to do what you are going to do – decide whether we like censorship or not. That’s a decision you will make. There is not, he said, an expert on the Holocaust. There are many versions. If one died, that’s important. If one died, that’s a crime. If one Jewish person died, it’s a crime. If one person, no matter whether he was Jewish or not died, it’s a crime. But that is not the issue.

AliceinWonderland

If we are dealing with the issue of genocide, mass murder by gassing, not by work or privation, or war, but this specific crime with the specific weapon of gas chambers; if that’s the issue, then we have to give freedom to others to put forward their views. That’s what Doug Collins said. He said Zundel’s pamphlet is a point of view. He doesn’t agree with it, but he upholds its right to be said.

When Hilberg was asked whether Zundel was being honest, he said what I think we all have to answer in the way of a question: “Can you read his mind? Can you look into his brain?” All you can do is look at the printed word. You had a chance to hear him. You’ve had a chance to see him cross-examined about his beliefs and whether he is this, and whether he is that. He’s not perfect. He is not a perfect human being and neither am I, neither are most people I know. So, why should he be on the stand for having views that maybe you don’t agree with? Why?

Considering The West, War and Islam, I’d like to draw your attention to a significant part of that publication. It says, for the cost of one plane, one rocket, one bullet, we can make a film, a book, or send a letter. That’s what Zundel tried to do, change the Arab response to Zionism, from violence to communication. Is that a crime? Is that an intent dangerous to the social or racial harmony of Canada, when the pamphlet was sent in a sealed envelope to people in the Middle East? Whether he said things that were right or wrong, being quite aside for the moment, would that itself be a crime – would it affect the social and racial harmony of Canada deleteriously? It would seem to me that all it would ever accomplish, if it could accomplish what it sought to do, would be to convert Arab responses of violence and terrorism into Arab responses of communication with the hope that somebody might bring influence in a political sense to bear on the whole problem of the Middle East. It would seem a fairly responsible, albeit somewhat grandiose hope, maybe a pious hope, at a time when Mr. Zundel perceived, perhaps rightly, perhaps wrongly, that problems in the Middle East were about to erupt in a world war. Most of us would sit back and watch it on television, do nothing about it and hope that somebody else would act. Well, Mr. Zundel is not that kind of man. He desired a solution. He thought he could offer one. Now, if that’s a crime, we’d better forget about communicating. It would seem to me to communicate the alternative to planes, rockets and bullets of films, books and letters, is a pretty good solution to the problem. It sure brings us a lot closer to a solution than silence or violence. I don’t, with the greatest of respect, understand how the Crown can allege that my client is supposed to have upset racial or social tolerance in Canada by sending such letters, as he did to people in the Middle East, thousands of miles away.

The only two publications in which Mr. Zundel is alleged to have done anything wrong are The West, War and Islam, and this one. Is this wrong? And when he wasn’t sure, he took the chance, and published, and sent it to whom? Hiding something here? No, he sent it to the Attorney-General of Ontario, sent it to all the Attorneys-General, sent it to the Members of Parliament, and school teachers. He even wrote to the Attorney-General and said: “If you don’t think I’m entitled to publish this, please give me some guidelines.”

If this country is going to involve itself in censorship through official channels like the Attorney-General of Ontario, then I suggest it owes it to the citizens to tell them where the legal limits to freedom lie. If it was a suggestion made by the Crown that the accused deliberately provoked a situation damaging to racial and social tolerance, then why did he ask for an answer as to what he’s entitled to publish? Why didn’t someone give him an answer? I’ll tell you why; because it’s politically embarrassing for an Attorney-General to identify the real censorship that he’s seeking to introduce through fear. It’s easier to prosecute somebody and scare the whole world into keeping quiet, because they don’t want to be where he is. It works very well, but it’s rather insidious, and I suggest the best answer to that kind of censorship through fear, is to throw out these types of charges.

If they’re going to invoke censorship, they’d better write it down and say so and take responsibility for it in the House of Commons. Then, the public will know we don’t live in a free country anymore and can vote against them; but if they’re going to play this kind of political game with censorship by scaring people, by not answering their letters, as to what they’re entitled to write, the result is self-censorship. It’s called, “everybody keep their mouth shut,” That’s something Doug Collins mentioned. The result of the controversy surrounding the Holocaust and the danger of questioning it and the fact that you always get a visit from some particular group if you write on it, results in self-censorship. It’s not official censorship and so we can tell the world that we don’t censor people, but you just watch it. You don’t write about this and you don’t write about that and you keep your mouth shut about this because it’s safer.

I suggest that if you have any doubt about that, you take a good look at the Soviet constitution. They have glowing phrases about freedom of speech, but it’s often limited by some qualifying words about security of the State, and, suddenly, people know better than to say certain things. They know better than to criticize the government, they know better than to raise questions about certain issues, and they know better than to talk about the Helsinki Accord, or a few other subjects in the Soviet Union. What’s the difference with this question? It seems that political power has some influence in what you’re entitled to say and what you’re entitled to do, without it ever being responsible for censoring publicly through the legal process.

Section 177 is a very vague way of defining what you publish. If you’re talking about history, what’s false? There are so many views and so many issues. How can you be sure what you’re entitled to say? I suppose the best solution is, as Doug Collins said, on a subject like the Holocaust, to check with the Canadian Jewish Congress or the B’nai Brith as to what you can publish.

 

BBCanlogo

CANADA’S OPPONENTS OF FREE SPEECH
_____________________________________

But I suggest that you could and should send a message to the world and to the rest of society. It’s not a message that’s intolerant; it is a message of decency, tolerance and understanding, a message to all the sincere young Jewish men and women around the world that perhaps they need not feel more persecuted nor the subject of more hate than any other group; that the war was not all that it is said to be vis-a-vis themselves; that they might no longer say, “Never forgive and never forget,” those types of comments; that they may feel no more the victims of suffering than others in war who have also suffered. Maybe that would be a healthy thing to say, beneficial to all. Perhaps. Just perhaps, they too should put behind them the story of the six million slaughter which they are being imbued and embittered with. Perhaps their suffering is no worse nor any greater than many, many others. So, for the sake of love, peace and understanding, we may not view Jews as extraordinary sufferers, and Nazis, which is a thin disguise, in much of our media, for Germans, as some inherently evil beasts. This stereotyping is intolerance. This evil exultation of hate can only be exorcized in the fresh air of free debate. That can only come through freedom to examine truth freely and throw off unnecessary guilt. If the guilt is necessary, it should be accepted. If it is unnecessary, it should be dispensed with, dropping the disproportionate lies of a mass hysteria which certain political forces daily feed upon. Stop seeing Nazis in every criticism of Judaism, or you will suffer from lack of true criticism. No one is absolutely right, not even the Jews; and no one is absolutely wrong, not even the Germans.

It should be at least open for people to discuss the Holocaust, and, if it isn’t, how healthy a society do we have? We should never suspend our critical faculties of reason and skepticism even to the suffering of the Jews on the issue of the Holocaust. Other groups of people are freely criticized every day. You know, when I was thinking about the context of this whole question, it occurred to me, that there are other atrocity stories, two of which are very famous. One is the Ukrainian Holocaust, or some people dare to call it that, where it is alleged in the thirties, Stalin starved to death five or six million Ukrainian people.

Now, if I was to put together all the evidence that contradicted that, that said it was a false belief, and published that, would that be false news? Or the Armenians say that a million or more of their people were slaughtered by the Turks in 1915 and they hold this as a very important part of their belief. If I were to dispute that and publish my views, would that be false news? And yet, whatever the truth or falsity of those beliefs may be, they stand on their own. No government sanctions say you must believe this. They are not taught in schools as history. In fact, I recently heard that you can’t teach the Ukrainian Holocaust in Manitoba in schools. But, this belief in the Holocaust has become so sacred that nobody can even question it. That is not right. In a free society, no group should have its beliefs imposed by law. We don’t have a state religion. We shouldn’t have one. We don’t have an official history. We shouldn’t have one. If this booklet is right, as the accused says it is, it should be freely heard and freely thought about and freely criticized. If it is not, why fear it? If it is false, there is easy access to a million more resources of public persuasion than this booklet ever had. It does not need the government’s help as some official repository of truth, however sanctimonious its bureaucratic officials may be. Let freedom solve the problem of any hatred or intolerance, else by suppression the human spirit, which seeks truth and seeks the ultimate truth of God, will become crippled by its fears to speak its deepest feelings. Only by our meeting fact to face, by our being as we really are with all our personal prejudices and suspicions, can we accept our faults and by airing our views without fear, learn to love each other with a true and deeper love than if we never disagreed in the first place.

Now, if my client has a wrong belief, he honestly does not believe his beliefs are wrong. He believes they are right. Then, let there be a debate. He invites debate. To the extent a free society allows debate, health and understanding will result. Let a few people decide, let the powerful decide, let some bureaucrat decide, or even, with the greatest of respect, force the duty upon a judge to decide what are true and false beliefs, and the State will inevitably have the power to define truth and become an absolute power. Violence is the end of the road for official truth. In a society where people aren’t free to have their own views, and official truth prevails, they will eventually resort to violence. You see that in many dictatorships throughout the world. If you can’t express views freely in words, in writing, in print, how do people express them? You can see in the world today how they generally do, and that’s very unfortunate.

I said in the beginning, this place, this court, is far too expensive, far too important, to be involved in debates about history. This court and the courts throughout Canada have rules of evidence which are there to determine disputes of fact, but here we haven’t dealt with fact, we’ve dealt with opinion about history. Free access to the marketplace of ideas does not and cannot take place here. This court was not designed to be a place where the affairs of the world are debated, but rather where individual conduct is inquired into.

Whoever is responsible for pursuing these kinds of prosecutions, and it is indeed, I suggest, a decision for which somebody is responsible, he should consider what is at stake, and what occurs in the court, and consider that it shouldn’t happen again. If by acquitting the accused, you make it clear that this is an improper type of thing to do to a citizen in a free society, we won’t have these sorts of trials again, I suggest. It would be less likely that those who made this decision in the first place will repeat it. But I can assure you that there are many people who would love to have the power to silence different points of view, and it’s very easy when you can put people through the kind of thing the accused has been through. I suggest the false news section may have been intended to deal with a specific allegation of false news like a publication of a sort which briefly stated a fact to be true that was false, but it surely can’t be usefully employed to deal with a matter of controversy involving history. The court should not deal with trials of historical issues. This place is too expensive and over-regulated by legal rules to permit an adequate discussion of history. For the sake of freedom, I ask you never to forget what is at stake here. You must remember that we have fought for your freedom as well as for that of the accused; that is, the accused stands in the place of anyone who desires to speak his mind. Even if you don’t approve or agree with what he says, you must take it as a sacred responsibility not to allow the suppression of someone’s honest beliefs.

I want to finish by reading you a little letter that I got once. It explains what I mean when I say history is a very complex thing and it changes from time to time and it should be free to do so. It says, “What is truth? As a child I was taught that the Indians were savages. Later on in life I found out that it was the white man who had initiated scalping and the killing of women and children. I was taught in school that Louis Riel was a traitor to his country and therefore executed and that John A. MacDonald was a hero.

Later on in life I was to discover that Louis Riel is regarded by some as a hero defending his people’s rights to their land and the famous Sir John A. had been caught taking bribes from the CPR, and resigned in disgrace. He also died an alcoholic. During the Second World War, I was told that Stalin was a good leader who fought on the good side. When I was older I found out that he was responsible for the government-imposed starvation of millions of Ukrainians in 1933. In 1941 I was told that Germany was our enemy and Russia was our ally. In 1951 I was told that Germany was our ally and Russia was our enemy. In 1956 I was told that China slaughtered millions of its own people. It was our enemy and today I’m told that China is our friend and ally, in a way.”

Therefore, when an individual has the integrity to question the credibility of a government-imposed view of history, we should listen with an open mind and search for the truth. It would seem to me that the truth will be in debate for a long time. But if we silence one side of any dispute or anyone’s view of truth because we think he is wrong then society as a whole will suffer. An individual will suffer. And you will suffer.

Patrick Henry said: “Give me liberty or give me death.” If you don’t have liberty you have a kind of spiritual death, the death that comes from people who never use their minds. That’s a real spiritual death. If we are to live in a free society where people are alive and have hope in their lives then we must have liberty.

With the right verdict people who brought this prosecution into being will not do it again. It will take a lot of courage. But you are the repository of the trust of your country and in the moment you decide to acquit and stick to that principle you will give history the best gift your descendants could ever ask for: A free country.

—–
For further information on relevant cases, articles, letters, bio, videos and more please see: http://www.douglaschristie.com/

To obtain a copy of this document please contact Paul Fromm at CAFE, PO Box 332 Station “B”, Etobicoke, Ontario, M9W 9Z9 or write to Paul at paul@paulfromm.com

 

Harper government steals $9 million from taxpayers to fund covert Zionist ‘Digital Public Square Project’ by Arthur Topham

Munk SchoolHarperHdr

Harper government steals $9 million from taxpayers to fund covert Zionist ‘Digital Public Square Project’

by

Arthur Topham

January 9th, 2015

 

Chutzpah alone is insufficient a term to describe this latest move on the part of the Zionist controlled Harper government to undermine Canada’s former status as an independent, sovereign western democracy and drag it further down into the demonic pit of Isra-hell’s demented, psychopathic, war-crazed, terrorist-ridden criminal actions.

Driven by an unquenchable lust for power and control of the world via deception and control of foreign governments and being the pathological liars and swindlers that they are, nothing appears to deter the Zionist’s endless political machinations which inevitably include deceiving the general public in order to have the dumbed down goy pay for these traitor’s own nefarious aims. This transparent process is no better exemplified than in their latest swindle of $9 million bucks of taxpayers money to help Israel continue its relentless, hate-filled disinformation campaigns against the Russian Federation and the Muslim nations throughout the Middle East that Israel has its greedy little eyes set upon invading and controlling.

And what better way than to funnel that $9 million into a Jew-created Trojan Horse Zionist disinformation center like the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs and then have the funds laundered out to various private Zionist organizations by the Munk school’s former Director, the staunch Zionist matriarch and commissar, Professor Janice Gross Stein who will be overseeing this additional new project of the 21st century to undermine foreign nations in order to destroy them and take control of their resources.

GrossSteinBaird
Professor Janice Gross Stein and Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird at the launch of the Digital Public Square Project
.
The absolutely farcical and hypocritically cunning nature of this move on the part of the Harper government and its Jewish overlords is best illustrated in some of the more blatant statements made in the ZNP article regarding the notion of freedom of speech and the rights of citizens to criticize their governments which I will add further comment to as the sorry tale unfolds.

In a separate article which I found on the University of Toronto’s News homepage titled, “Government of Canada backs digital public square from U of T’s Munk School” writer Terry Lavender states that the Zionist Israeli disinformation scam, code-named the “Digital Public Square Project” is being marketed by the mendacious Munk and Harper Zionists as “a new project to increase digital communication access for people in countries ruled by repressive governments.” (That is, countries outside of our own.)

He then quotes Baird as stating, “Canada believes that by harnessing new digital technologies to support freedom and democracy we can help give a voice to the voiceless. Through the Digital Public Square project, the Munk School of Global Affairs will create open digital spaces to enable citizens to hold their governments to account in defending freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.” [all emphasis throughout this article is mine. AT.]

Professor Gross Stein then waxes eloquent in the Zionist style of deception that the world has now grown so used to hearing and delivers the following remarks on this latest subterfuge by stating, “Governments have jailed journalists, closed civil society organizations, and strengthened their firewalls to deny citizens access to the web. Using surveillance technologies, they monitor what their citizens post. [Heed this statement Det. Cst. Terry Wilson of the BC Hate Crime Team. AT.] Why do they do this? Because oppressive and authoritarian regimes fear the power of ideas. Ideas are what they fear most. And for good reason. Ideas create change. Ideas are what citizens exchange when we push against the constraints that others impose.

Gross Stein then announced that “Munk will work with partners in the private sector in Canada and others around the world on the project.”

Yes, and I’m positive that Stein and Munk, holding the key to the vault containing $9 million of Canadian taxpayer funds, will be most prudent in their spending of those ill-gained dollars making sure to pass them along to only pro-Israeli, pro-Zionist “partners” here at home and abroad.

 Janice Gross Stein Israeli Sayan

Wikipedia tells us that, “Stein is the [former. AT] director of the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto and Associate Chair and Belzberg Professor of Conflict Management and Negotiation within the University of Toronto’s political science department. She is a specialist in Middle East area studies; negotiation theory; foreign policy decision-making; and international conflict management, on which she has lectured at the Centre for National Security Studies in Ottawa and at the NATO Defense College in RomeItaly.

Oi vey! what can one say about such prestigious credentials? A lecturer at the NATO Defense College in Rome no less. NATO, the one organization that the Zionist Israelis and their sycophants are using constantly to threaten and intimidate and cajole nations into allowing the US to set up nuclear weapons on their land in order to surround those who don’t kowtow to the Rothschild global agenda for a one world totalitarian government. Does it sound like Professor Gross Stein might have some peripheral interest in what’s happening in Israel and Palestine and Iran and Iraq and Libya and Syria and Lebanon and Russia that might make her the perfect “neutral” “Canadian” spokesperson to bring freedom of expression and Internet freedom to all those ignorant slaves throughout the Middle East and Russia who are suffering under “oppressive and authoritarian regimes” and unable to express their thoughts and feelings and ideas because of those brutes will resort to anything, including throwing someone in jail, merely for expressing their opinions on issues and on their governments.

Stein&May

Going back to the Zionist National Post we find the Harper Zionist occupation government referring to their latest conspiracy with the Munk megalomaniacs as “direct diplomacy” where, according to ‘Bimbo the Obescient’ Baird, the “partnership” in crime “would open up online spaces for political dialogue within “restrictive and repressive environments.” Hmmm… he wasn’t thinking about Canada was he I thought to myself as I read it.

The article goes on to describe this latest initiative in mind-control of Canadians and citizens of other independent nations as a further development of an earlier psych-op used to try and undermine Iran and gain western support for Israel to attack that nation based upon fabricated lies about “nuclear weapons” and the threat to Israel, a plan that never gained enough traction to come to fruition (thank God!).

Baird then has the balls (metaphically-speaking of course) to state that the project would “‘increase digital space for free expression,’ allowing citizens to stay informed, share their opinions and advocate for their rights.”

Some more juicy quotes from the same article:

“We believe that citizens of all countries must be able to express themselves freely, to hold their governments to account as well as to exchange information and ideas.”

“The internet is a game-changing technology on these issues. It has the ability to empower individuals more than any other technology before it. This scares some people in power and so regimes around the world are increasingly working to restrict the Internet.

The writer then goes on to quote excerpts on Internet freedom from the U.S.-based (Zionist Jew, pro-Israeli) non-profit Freedom House, stating that other countries were “rapidly adopting new laws that legitimize existing repression and effectively criminalize online dissent, [and] as a result, more people than ever were being arrested for the things they had posted online.

“Blocking and filtering — once the most widespread methods of censorship — are still very common, but many countries now prefer to simply imprison users who post undesirable content, thereby deterring others and encouraging self-censorship.

Hmmm…. I again thought to myself, finally they’re catching up to good ol’ “democratic” Canada who has had these repressive laws enshrined in their criminal code now for decades beginning with the “Hate Propaganda” laws under Section 318 to 320 of the Canadian Criminal Code and then the now repealed sec. 13 “hate crime” legislation used to silence dozens of Canadian citizens who were all trying to alert their nation to the real threat of the Zionist interlopers who are now in control of Canada’s the ship of state. These Zionist created laws were all designed to stifle and silence and jail Canadians for precisely the same “crimes” that these two-faced, hypocritical Zionist bigots in Ottawa and the University of Toronto are now proposing to stem in other countries.

So here I am a Canadian citizen facing a sec. 319(2) Criminal Code of Canada “Hate Propaganda” charge laid filed against me by a member of Canada’s most influential Jewish lobby organization B’nai Brith Canada because I was deemed by this individual zealot and one other psychopathic Zionist sycophant to have expressed my opinions and published the opinions and facts of others regarding the dangerous presence here in my home and native land of foreign government influences, to wit, the Zionist state of Israel and the control of my country’s news media by this same group of criminal war-mongers and international gangsters. And on top of that I’m facing a possible two-year jail sentence should I be found guilty of said “crime” and while all of this charade has been ongoing now RIGHT HERE IN CANADA FOR THE PAST EIGHT YEARS Baird the buffoon and Harper the traitor and now Janice the Jew sayan are all telling me and the rest of Canada that they’re going to take $9 million dollars out of our pockets to help other nations preserve THEIR right to freedom of expression!

Am I missing something here? Are you?

—–

 

Kourosh Ziabari Interview with Canadian Professor Denis Rancourt – Fars News Agency

KouroshInterviewRancourtHdr

RPEdNew400 copy

Editor’s Note: The following interview with Professor Rancourt is undoubtedly one of the finest contributions toward a greater understanding of how the West has been slowly taken over by the Zionist agenda. Whether we wish to view it (as Professor Rancourt appears to), as the American Empire using Israel for its own greater hegemonic agenda or whether we tend to see it as World Jewry’s take-over of the American government via stealth in order to commandeer its resources and exploit them for Zionism’s global conquest, Rancourt’s analysis of how this process has unfolded to the ongoing detriment of the Palestinian people is superlative.
 
The interview also succinctly explains the depth and degree of collusion which the various Zionist forces and their sycophants here in Canada went to in order to illegally remove Professor Rancourt from his academic position at the University of Ottawa and then to further exacerbate his unjust treatment by pursuing him with a defamation suit that basically bankrupt the man. Such extremely vexatious acts on the part of Allan Rock and the University of Ottawa, aided and abetted by Canada’s Zionist-controlled media, border on sadism and are a vivid reminder of just how cruel and criminal the Zionist cartel can be when it comes to protecting its own racket of death and destruction at any cost should Canadians have the audacity to exhibit their lawful constitutional right to freedom of expression. In this case Professor Rancourt’s only “crime” was to question the right of Israel’s ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people.
 
I suppose Denis Rancourt might be expected to consider himself lucky that he wasn’t also slapped with a sec. 319(2) Criminal Code of Canada “Hate Propaganda” charge on top of all the other woes he’s been subjected to by the Zionist-controlled judiciary here in Canada. I’m sure that they would love to send him to jail for a couple of years just as they are trying to do to me in order to reinforce their intimidation and threats to all of Canada’s academia never to question their authority or their evil designs.
 
Professor Rancourt has taken a courageous stand and like myself he needs your help in order to defend himself against all of these spurious charges that have resulted from his expressing his opinions on matters relevant to Canada’s democratic principles. For further information and contact please see:
Email contact: denis.rancourt@gmail.com

Funding campaign

Bio

————

KouroshPortrait copy 2

Kourosh Ziabari – Fars News Agency: A Canadian scholar and academic, who was fired from the university where he was teaching because of his pro-Palestinian viewpoints, believes the US government is funding and supporting Israel for its continued bloodletting in the Middle East.

According to Prof. Denis Rancourt, Israel’s plan in the Middle East is ethnic cleansing and the total obliteration of Palestine and its citizens in order to realize a colonial, imperial agenda backed by the US military, economic and finance empire.

“Israel’s program is to eradicate or neutralize all Palestinians who make claim to a home in Palestine. This is exactly what Israel has been doing since before its artificial creation,” said Prof. Rancourt in an exclusive interview with Fars News Agency.

“Israel’s program is planned incremental dispossession and an ongoing attempted genocide. This has been repeatedly and explicitly expressed by the Zionist architects and executioners,” he noted.

Prof. Denis Rancourt has also praised the resistance movement in the Gaza Strip for its steadfastness against the Israeli aggression during the past two months, maintaining that it was awe-inspiring that Hamas could kill some 70 invading Israeli soldiers.

Denis Rancourt is a former professor of physics at the University of Ottawa. In the fall of 2008, he was removed from all teaching duties under the pretext that he had granted A+ grades to 23 students in one course during the winter 2008 semester; however, it’s quite clear to everybody that his outspoken criticism of Israel and his pro-Palestinian activism had triggered his dismissal from the university. Prof. Rancourt’s classes were always attended by tens of students and he was considered as one of the popular university professors at the Faculty of Science.

Rancourt has published more than 100 academic papers. He was a member of Ottawa-Carleton Institute for Physics and the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre. He is the author of the book “Hierarchy and Free Expression in the Fight Against Racism.”

During the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip that just ended on August 26 following the victory of Hamas and the declaration of ceasefire between the Israeli regime and the resistance movement, FNA did an interview with Prof. Denis Rancourt on the influence of the Israeli lobby over the media, politicians and universities in the West, the history of Israel-Canada relations and the international reactions to the recent Israeli war on Gaza. The following is the text of this in-depth interview.

Q: What’s your viewpoint regarding the influence of the Israeli lobby on the universities and academic unions in the West, especially in the North America? The case of your dismissal from your position as a professor at the University of Ottawa was simply one of numerous instances showing that the Israeli lobby can easily manipulate the university officials in the West into making illegal decisions and expelling the disobedient academicians, just like the Prof. Steven Salaita who has been recently fired from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign for his comments criticizing the Israeli massacre in the Gaza Strip. How has Israel gained such an influence over the academic institutions in the West?

A: The Israel Lobby has the role of chief-whip for the US military-economic-finance empire; Empire, for short. That is, the Lobby ensures doctrinal discipline among Western, that is, US-aligned politicians, intellectuals, and the media, regarding the Empire’s Middle East policy. I mean “intellectual” in the broad sense of any professional who has influence, and “media” in the broad sense of anyone who communicates to others.

The Empire’s main geopolitical focus presently is the Middle East, where the Empire is dedicated to actively and continuously prevent liberation and coalescence of Arab nations, so as to keep control of the territory and the energy resources. To achieve this, the Empire’s main policy in the Middle East is Israel, which is charged with continual war and sabotage against all Middle Eastern entities that would vie for independence from the Empire.

Thus, the Empire, via Israel, is embarked on a vicious and murderous project without an end in the Middle East, and this unsavory project must be sold to the Empire’s home populations, including both managers and ordinary citizens. That is the role of the Israel Lobby; to sell Israel and the continuous and deliberate carnage as acceptable and unavoidable.

That is why the Israel Lobby is actively engaged is creating Islamophobia, in exaggerating anti-Semitism, in constructing Nazi-holocaust remembrance, in suppressing academic freedom, in suppressing freedom of the press, in “finding” and pursuing alleged “terrorists”, in developing anti-speech [or] “anti-hate” laws, in promoting cultural ties with Israel, in attacking Muslim associations, and so on.

As such, the work of the Israel Lobby includes hundreds of ongoing campaigns to intimidate, discipline, fire, and vilify academics who dare to be critical of Israel or of US Middle East policy. The list of shut-out and targeted academics is a long one and includes the well-known cases of Joel Kovel, Ward Churchill, Norman Finkelstein, James Petras, Terri Ginsberg, William Robinson, David F. Noble, Steven Salaita, Iymen Chehade, and many others. The more an academic is threatening to the Lobby, the more aggressively that academic is attacked.

My own case is also an example. I was a tenured Full Professor of physics at the University of Ottawa in Canada’s capital city. I am an internationally recognized researcher and I taught in both the Faculty of Science and the Faculty of Arts. I was publicly critical of the university president’s paid trip to Israel. I invited Palestinian speakers into my classrooms to talk about Gaza, and geopolitical analysts who were critical of Israel. These moves led to condemnation of me in the Zionist mainstream media, and to discipline, which was overturned. In 2008, a new university president – Allan Rock – who is a staunch and unconditional supporter of Israel and who had been Canada’s Zionist ambassador to the UN, became immediately motivated to fire me, tenure or not, and irrespective of my popular courses and my large science research funding.

A.RockMug

With the help of an entire team using specially-hired union-busting lawyers, after contriving for years including intensive covert surveillance of me using a hired-student spy to monitor my every spoken and written word and my every activity on campus and at other university campuses, the university finally settled on the false pretext for dismissal of alleging that I had improperly assigned high grades to all 23 students in an advanced physics course. They needed a “clean” pretext that they hoped would be supported by public opinion and that would not bring out all of their dirt. When public opinion and some mainstream media sided with me instead, a high-profile Zionist columnist at the New York Times suddenly wrote not-one but two articles to discredit me, and was invited to Canada to falsely defame me, regarding my teaching, on a trend-setting Canadian TV talk show whose producers are Zionists.

Even after I was fired, as I continued to be publicly critical of the institution, the university funded a large defamation lawsuit against me which, after almost four years, has entirely washed-out my personal savings, and over which I was ordered to pay a total of legal costs and damages in excess of one million dollars, that I can never pay. I am presently struggling to generate the funds to pay the costs of court-transcripts for the appeal that has been filed. My funding campaign is endorsed by the Ontario Civil Liberties Association, which also has a campaign that condemns the university’s unlimited funding of the lawsuit against me using public money.

Although the university had many and mixed unstated and illegitimate reasons for wanting to fire me – such as my defiance and outspokenness in several areas, my popular courses and public events, and my support of student and community activism, I have no doubt that I was fired because the new Zionist university president Allan Rock – former Ambassador to the UN, and former Canadian federal government minister – wanted me out and silenced at any cost, and knew that he could count on support from the Zionist establishment. Under cross-examination, the dean testified that the pre-dismissal lockout of my graduate students and I from our laboratory was directed from above by Allan Rock. This president knew my firing would be seen as a good deed by the powerful Zionist establishment that he is part of. Years before I was ultimately fired, it had already been pronounced in the media that my firing was necessary and was desirable because of the “anti-Semitic” nature of my courses, to the great dismay and protests of many of my students.

After I was escorted off campus in handcuffs by police and charged with “trespassing” while I was still a tenured professor, and since my firing in 2009, Allan Rock has been systematically transforming the University of Ottawa into an institutional instrument at the service of Canada’s accelerating “globalist” agenda, and at the service of legitimizing Israel’s role in that agenda — rather than actually prioritizing the learning environment for students in Ottawa, an environment that is in dire need of an overhaul.

Allan Rock needed me out of the way. The Empire needs critics of the Empire out of the way. And the Israel Lobby needs anyone who threatens the acceptance of Israel’s crimes out of the way.

Q: Why has the criticism of Israel become so costly in the West? Why are the academicians, media personalities and other public figures who dare to question the policies and practices of Israel being immediately vilified and denigrated as anti-Semitist? Moreover, why don’t the mainstream media in the West ever give coverage to the viewpoints critical of Israel or exposing its violations of international law?

A: The mainstream media is a highly perfected arm of the Empire’s propaganda apparatus, as are Hollywood, the music industry, video games, and so on. The barely-maintained illusions of freedom of the press and of artistic freedom only make the propaganda more effective.

The propaganda apparatus is an integral part of the Empire’s military structure. The Israel Lobby is an added structure for direct and forceful control of politicians and intellectuals concerning the role of Israel as the Empire’s main thug in the Middle East.

The Empire’s Israel-based violent control in the Middle East, in turn, gives control over energy and wealth, via both the energy itself and energy transportation routes, and helps to ensure that the US-dollar remains the petro-dollar and, thus, the World currency, which the US prints at will.

In this way, the Empire both maintains its main instrument of global exploitation, namely finance-extortion based on the US-dollar and enforced with military might, and suppresses the development of its main competitors by strategically controlling the energy market via sanctions, pricing, and directed profits. That is the Empire’s working theory, which is realistically achievable thanks to absolute military dominance.

Within this scheme, the Israel Lobby at home is in a symbiotic relation with the Empire. The two are inseparable as long as the Empire’s main geopolitical focus is the Middle East, and as long as the Empire’s main policy in the Middle East is Israel. This is why one finds a strong and visible Israel Lobby satellite in every Western nation that is aligned with the Empire: Canada, France, Australia, and so on.

The two elements that give the Israel Lobby its raison d’etre – namely, the Empire’s main geopolitical focus on the Middle East, and Israel as the Empire’s main policy in the Middle East – are not necessarily good for the Empire. But the Israel Lobby has gotten too powerful; to the point of being able to largely dictate the Empire’s geopolitical priorities, and the Empire’s goals.

Thus, the Israel Lobby has to a large extent overrun the US democracy. It is not presently possible for US politicians to objectively and freely discuss Israel’s role and the Empire’s foreign policy. Virtually no US politician has the backbone to do so. US critics of Israel who are sufficiently threatening are crushed, and the US establishment fully participates in these mobbings.

When the stakes are so high, it is impossible for the Israel Lobby to relax its aggressive stance against all ideological threats. The Lobby considers its intimidation campaigns to be necessary for its own survival. It uses bribery, extortion, and propaganda at every level to discipline all who need to be reminded of which peoples most need to be killed on the planet.

Q: Canada has usually been one of the major advocates and supporters of the Tel Aviv regime since its establishment in 1948, either financially, politically or militarily and has always justified its racist policies in the Occupied Territories publicly. Somewhere in a 2011 article, you noted that Canada does not have much significant trade ties with Israel, and is a net exporter of oil and gas itself. So, why do you think the Canadian politicians continue to offer their “unwavering support” to Israel and rationalize its atrocities against the besieged people of Gaza? Why does Canada always lobby to dissuade world countries from voting against Israel in the UN resolutions? In what ways does Canada benefit from backing Israel?

A: Interestingly, it was Allan Rock – the same man who engineered my firing from the University of Ottawa – who, in 2004, under Paul Martin’s Liberal government and as Canada’s Ambassador to the UN, changed Canada’s longstanding position on Israel from abstaining on human rights resolutions for Palestine to being one of the few countries in the World that vote with the US and Israel against UN human rights resolutions for Palestine.

The complete selling of Canada to the US started prior to Martin, notably at the hands of Conservative Prime Minister Brian “free trade” Mulroney who thereby destroyed the Conservative party for more than a decade. Martin continued the job of selling Canada. Paul Martin engineered a takeover of the Liberal Party of Canada from the last Prime Minister Jean Chrétien who was moderately independent, or wanted to appear to be, and Martin proceeded to wreck that party into oblivion, with the help of other Zionists such as Rock and Harvard-based import Michael Ignatieff who also wrote academic arguments to legitimize torture “in an age of terror”, and others. At present, all three major parties [of] Conservative, NDP, and Liberal are led by ultra-Zionists, which is no accident. Harper, in particular, vehemently demonizes Iran, in what can only be understood as a criminally irresponsible call for a war of aggression, in line with a well-known Israeli desire.

The reason that Canada gives unconditional diplomatic support to Israel is the same as with all states aligned with the Empire. There is no choice on that issue because Israel is a major component of the Empire’s World-domination apparatus. The Israel Lobby is existentially committed to keeping things that way. The widespread tolerance and political adoration of the anti-democratic Israel Lobby in the US suggests that it is now not unreasonable to entertain an analysis of the Empire as a US-Israel Empire, as though the elite-bosses that run the global military-finance exploitation enterprise had effectively merged across US-Israel lines.

The other main Western states vie to align themselves in order to be on the receiving side of the Empire’s global exploitation project. This alignment is the most disgusting and vicious enactment of global racism in human history – largely surpassing its immediate predecessor that was the British Empire – that directly targets indigenous populations in the developing and emerging world, whether or not these populations support resistance movements. In this regard, a color-coded world map of diplomatic stance regarding Israel is identical to a world map of the global exploitation by the states aligned with the Empire.

Canada, in particular, is more than aligned. Canada is truly a vassal state of the US, with virtually complete integration in the political, corporate, security, military, cultural, and intelligentsia spheres. It is not uncommon for high-ranking “Canadian” politicos to have been trained at Harvard. The entertainment and sports enterprises are seamlessly the same, except for Quebec to some degree. This deepening integration has been accompanied by a loss of Canadian nationalism, a dramatically increased Israel Lobby presence, a dumbing down of the provincial education systems, an abandonment of natural-resources ownership, a near-total loss of resistance to foreign corporate ownership, frightening mimicry in the cultural, political, statutory, military, police, etc., fields, and so on.

Years ago, as one personal anecdote, I was shocked to find that the airport security in Ottawa, for an internal flight in Canada, was being managed by a US firm, that the security employees were US citizens, spoke with heavy US accents, and did not speak French – Canada is bilingual, and Ottawa is its capital. I was on stolen Canadian soil being processed by US security personnel. That is now the norm. Canadian citizens have a lot of work to do if they want to effectively oppose US and Israeli crimes against humanity.

Of course the local Canadian establishment needs to benefit from Canada being a vassal state of the Empire. So your question of how does Canada benefit is a fair one. The first answer is that Canada is allowed to share in the plunder practiced by the Empire, to a limited and controlled degree. In addition, Canada is given a share of the Empire’s military economy, in terms of military manufacturing contracts, and is temporarily allowed to have a First World standard of living, even though it must permit its natural resources to be plundered.

Also, Canada is a major producer of oil from tar sands that are relatively expensive to exploit. Wars and imposed sanctions in the Middle East increase the price of oil, which serves the Canadian energy sector well, in terms of political benefits. The price of gas is also increased, which inadvertently serves Russia. Thus, Russia must be sanctioned and cut off from the European market. Enter Ukraine, etc. Energy is geopolitics and Canada, as a major energy producer, “chooses” to be on the side of the big guns.

Q: What do the ordinary Canadian citizens, and the young generation of Canadian people think about Israel and its ongoing campaign of carnage and genocide in the besieged Gaza Strip? Do they sympathize with the major Canadian parties, including the Conservatives, Liberals and the NDP in their unwarranted support for Israel?

A: Political participation in Canada is a farce. By statute – thanks to former Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau – all local political candidates must be approved and certified by the party leader. Therefore, unlike in the UK where local party members can choose their representatives and where parliamentary rule actually means something, there is no representative democracy whatsoever in Canada. It does not take a PhD in political science to understand this. The employment and career of each Member of Parliament depends on obeying party discipline, and the party bosses are selected and positioned by powerful private interests predominantly represented by the Israel Lobby.

Ordinary Canadians, young and old, understand that politics does not include them. Consequently, political participation is low. The smaller the citizen’s possible influence, the less [they] participate, logically. In Canada – like in most places where citizens do not feel overly threatened by their governments or by foreign influences or by war – effective political allegiance is hired directly using widespread partisan employment, by the government, the public institutions, the private corporations, the hired lobbies, and the non-government organizations. In addition, superficial popular acceptance of fake agendas is bought via disguised propaganda projected by the “educational” system, the media, and the hired “experts” from all sectors. This works brilliantly because most professional workers are fully indoctrinated into the system.

Among aware Canadians, however, there is great concern about Israel’s crimes in Gaza. This concern and resulting outrage are significant, as is evident from the massive media and public-relations counter campaigns to legitimize Israel’s war crimes.

Canadian civil society is recognizing and organizing against the Israel genocide that continues to unfold. There has been a significant backlash against the public positions of the leaders of the three major parties, and this backlash has caused the NDP in particular to do some damage-control. A Member of Parliament even resigned from the NDP over the issue, which is a first in Canada. Furthermore, in reporting the carnage in Gaza, the mainstream media was feeling the pressure to not completely follow the most absurd dictates of the Israel Lobby regarding media strategy.

The recent public demonstrations in support of Gaza, held in every major Canadian city, were massive, by Canadian standards. The pro-Palestine demonstrations that I attended in Ottawa had hundreds and thousands of participants and were among the largest that I have ever witnessed. More importantly, the demonstrators were from across Canadian society and were profoundly moved and committed, more than I have ever seen for any broad Canadian foreign policy matter. Consequently, the mainstream media was forced to report these demonstrations in a somewhat balanced fashion, under the threat of losing credibility.

Thus, there is a significant enough gap, between the extreme Zionism of the political party leaders and public opinion on Gaza, that it is possible that there could be a large and lasting popular backlash that would change the public political discourse and force the Lobby to be less overt. I more than hope that this backlash will be of formidable magnitude and that it will occur at an accelerated pace, in order to create and recover the dignity of Canadians, to bring Canadians into the World, and to bring maximum support to the Palestinian resistance.

Q: During its more than 50 days of incursion into the Gaza Strip, Israel continually bombed the civilian areas, hospitals, mosques and schools. The deliberate targeting of the civilians is a crime under international law. Why is Israel persistent on violating international law while its leaders know what they’re doing is not humane and defendable? Is it because Israel has been enjoying immunity from accountability thanks to the public diplomatic, political and financial support it receives from the United States?

A: It is criminally and morally disgusting that Israel continued to bomb Gaza during the negotiations for the agreement that led to a halt to further Israeli attacks for an “unlimited period”. It is utterly disgusting that Israel murdered the wife and a daughter and a son of the Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif during negotiations. Israel continued to murder Hamas opponents during negotiations. This is abominable. It is difficult to comprehend this degree of disregard by Israel for basic human decency, not to mention international law. This tells us that Israel never negotiated in good faith, and that the “negotiated” agreement cannot possibly represent any measure of interim justice.

The Palestinian resistance in Gaza is awe-inspiring, having killed some 70 invading soldiers that were part of one of the most technologically advanced militaries in the World, and Gazans having sustained unspeakable civilian death, displacement, and destruction. However, Israel is in fact mainly contained by the global political and popular reactions to its crimes. The US cannot afford to convince the World that it is a genocidal-maniac nation, whether it is or not. This would seriously impair the Empire, domestically, with allies, and in its arenas of exploitation.

This is why the Empire funds and supports Israel for the constant bloodletting in the Middle East, and covertly trains and funds proxy thugs wherever it cannot sell a direct intervention, such as in Syria. Make no mistake, the US runs a global empire, with over 1,000 military bases spread in every corner of the globe, but it cannot be perceived in Western circles as an outright purveyor of ruthless and unlimited terror. Just don’t ask Latin Americans what they know from lived experience.

In this regard, a reality that protects the world from US-Israeli ravages is the fact that, more and more, there are Muslim, Latin American, etc., populations in the US and in the aligned countries, such as the Muslim citizens of the UK, and the Latin Americans in the US. This, in turn, explains the growing government fixations on preventing immigration and systemically targeting profiled refugees for deportation. It also explains the police-state occupation and incarceration in the US of the Black and Hispanic less-integrated social classes.

Basically, all the survival, self-defense, and liberation struggles against and from-within the Empire share a common oppressor. These struggles can greatly benefit from Western middle class allies, and from Western middle class indignation. The elite management class has connections to the professional class, which is largely from the middle class, and so on. In this way, “public opinion”, beyond simply most members of the public having some superficial opinion, can pressure towards rejecting the most egregious abuses of the Empire.

Q: In response to Israel’s deadly military operation against the Gaza Strip, the United States simply said that Israel has a right to defend itself, and a right to exist. Are these rights, including a right to exist, contingent upon the destruction of the entire civilian infrastructure in a coastal territory that has been under siege for some 7 years, and the blowing up of its unarmed citizens? Do the US politicians really think this way or are pretending that they’re not aware of the realities of Gaza on the ground?

A: The “right to exist” and “right to defend itself” postures of Israel are ridiculous sophistries that a child can recognize as such. Israelis have a right to not be displaced arbitrarily without a just process. That process must weigh all the facts related to Israel’s long-term genocidal policies and actions of population cleansing and annexing of territory. It must also respect international law, and respect unrescinded UN resolutions. And, it cannot reward continued violations by Israel of the said UN resolutions regarding territorial lines.

The Israeli spin concocted to justify Israel’s gruesome crimes of war is so insulting to the intellect that in itself it could be considered a crime, a crime of language, if it made any sense to have such a category of crimes. Indeed, if it were advisable to condone the development of a criminal law for “hate speech”, then Israel’s spin, uttered in the context of its massacres in Gaza, should certainly qualify as “hate speech”.

As usual, Israel turns everything on its head. The Israel Lobby seeks “hate speech” laws to be enacted in all the aligned states, to prevent criticism of Israel, as being “anti-Semitic” speech of course. This explicitly exists in France, and persists in Canada, where one elderly Canadian citizen was sent to jail in Germany for years for printed publications denying “the” holocaust. Here, the Lobby finds allies in well-meaning middle-class advocates of purified language who wrongly and self-servingly believe that racism can and should be reduced by strict language and social behaviour codes.

If it were serious about discussing rights, Israel would admit the Palestinian rights of return and of self-determination. It would respect the right to life and liberty enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It would respect the Geneva Conventions on military occupation. It would release all of its Palestinian prisoners. It would stop using its mass-killing machine against civilians, and so on. After that, it would also agree to be judged independently in making substantial reparations to all Palestinians, especially those occupied and the refugees.

Q: The United Nations has just appointed a fact-finding committee to probe into Israel’s possible war crimes during its recent military operation against the Gaza Strip. Do you see the political will and determination in the United Nations to really hold Israel accountable and investigate its criminal conduct in an impartial and fair way?

A: We’ll see. The more interesting question is whether citizens will provide a significant backlash if the commissioners do not properly do what must be done. And, will Israel and the Empire succeed in derailing this UN commission of inquiry into Israel’s war crimes?

Will this commission allow the UN to salvage some credibility? Will the Lobby succeed in its personal attacks against the commission’s chairman? Will anything significant on the ground come from the legalistic exercise?

Nothing significant has come from the UN in the past. This Gaza massacre was as criminal and as evil as the previous one. The only evolution has been the development of the remarkable Gazan military resistance, from killing three invading soldiers in the previous land incursion, to some 70 Israeli soldiers this time. We can only hope that this progression will continue, enough to deter Israel.

Q: What do you think is the reason for Israel’s obduracy in keeping the blockade of Gaza Strip in place and its continued refusal to lift it? Is the siege going to serve certain purposes, such as the demonization of Hamas and turning the residents of Gaza against it?

A: Israel’s program is to eradicate or neutralize all Palestinians who make claim to a home in Palestine. This is exactly what Israel has been doing since before its artificial creation. Israel’s program is planned incremental dispossession and an ongoing attempted genocide. This has been repeatedly and explicitly expressed by the Zionist architects and executioners.

Over 300 Nazi Holocaust survivors and their descendants recently signed an open letter, published as an advertisement in the New York Times, calling what Israel is doing what it is, genocide. Israel’s attempted genocide of Palestinians is also expressly cheered-on by many Israeli citizens and by members of the Zionist diaspora of all religions.

Therefore, the Israeli apartheid is not meant as a sustained apartheid. It is an increment in the attempted genocide that accompanies the racist pillaging of land and resources. The massacres in Gaza and the collective punishments against Gazans can be understood only in this context.

As such, Israel will continue the gruesome intimidations of all sorts, which are Israel’s history, and which are intended to cause Palestinians to flee from Palestine. Israel wants Gaza. And, Israel wants all Palestinians out of the greater Israel that it is creating.

The US accepts Israel’s crimes against Palestinians because the US “accepts” Israel’s conviction that this is necessary for Israel’s “security”. The US acceptance of the Zionist genocide is part of the negotiated understanding between the Empire and Israel. The US propaganda about seeking restraint is purely deflection and risk management for the Empire.

Furthermore, Israel knows that a real impediment to its greater design, its final solution, is Palestinian armed resistance, presently limited to Gaza. Israel, therefore, has an illegitimate military objective to strangle the armed resistance and to murder its leaders and closest enablers, and the Zionists willfully disregard international law to pursue this aim. It is a classic dirty war of extermination of popular armed resistance. If Israel cannot kill the armed resistance, then it plans to expel and kill the population that supports the resistance. In any case, it wants Gaza.

Within this criminal mentality, there is no way that Israel will voluntarily relax the blockade. The fight to dissolve the blockade, and even just to have Israel respect the general language of the ceasefire agreement to ease restrictions at the Gaza border crossings, will be continuous and arduous.

This is what Israel does. It strangles Palestinians. Only real pressures can slow Israel and, one day soon, turn it around. Things can happen. Populations can enforce democratic rule. Leaders can side with popular movements. Anything is possible when resisters everywhere become committed and determined. It happened in the recent past with liberation struggles everywhere when the British Empire was forced to retract, and with civil rights and democratized institutions in the 1960s. It’s happening in Latin America now. It’s happening on the streets. It can happen again and everywhere.

This interview was originally published on Fars News Agency.

——-

EDGAR STEELE IS DEAD! MURDERED BY ZIO-INFESTED U.S. GOVERNMENT

FREEEDGARSTEELE copy

Edgar Steele is dead. Murdered by his government for telling the TRUTH about the Zionist Jew take-over of America. God bless his soul.

News has just been released by Ed’s wife Cyndi on the website set up to help free Ed from illegal incarceration:

Cyni SteelePic

GOVERNMENT MURDERS EDGAR STEELE – CAN THEY GET AWAY WITH IT?

Today, September 4, 2014, early afternoon, a California mortuary notified Mrs. Cyndi Steele that her husband Edgar was dead. At this time, specific circumstances regarding Mr. Steele’s death are being confirmed. The Free Edgar Steele web site and the Edgar Steele Defense Fund (ESDF) will release more information when available.

Mrs. Steele contacted the ESDF Board, saying she was utterly devastated by this information, and is furious that no Victorville representative contacted her in the last few days regarding his failing health and did not even call her regarding the death of her husband. It was cruel to allow the mortuary to make the call.

Based on the best knowledge at hand, the following are the most likely causes of death: drug overdoses, persistently delayed, insufficient, improper medical treatment and medical neglect.  The federal government and Victorville Penitentiary bears responsibility for the lives of the inmates who reside there and has refused to be accountable for the decline in Edgar Steele’s health.

Some hours before Mrs. Steele was contacted by the mortuary, ESDF President Robert Magnuson received an email corroborating Ms. Steele’s concern for her husband’s health and safety that showed Mr. Steele’s health has been in a sharp decline for the past month, which fact was obscured, if not hidden by the federal government.

First, Mr. Steele was the victim of a false prosecution, then he was imprisoned in the most dangerous prison health in America. Then his wife was never allowed to visit him despite a court order allowing visitation. Then, his health was compromised because of  neglect, and finally, the reports came in that he had been drugged out of his mind earlier this week, which was the final blow that killed him. Call it anything else you like, but it is murder.

The facts of this tragic situation will be disclosed as the information is gathered.

——–

RPEdNew400 copy

[Editor’s Note: I worked with Ed Steele for many years prior to his arrest and incarceration on trumped up charges that eventually resulted in his wilfully orchestrated murder by the current Zionist controlled US government. This is truly a sad, sad day for justice and freedom of speech everywhere for that is the primary reason that Ed was arrested. He was telling the truth about the Zionist Jews and their illegal control of his country. Ed was a sincere and honest and straight-shooting soul. The fact that this has happened to him ought to send shivers through decent folks around the world and make them stop and take a good look at the forces that are now in control of the Western world. It’s well past the time that people said ENOUGH!]

CHASED BY A KLEZMER  by Gilad Atzmon

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/chased-by-a-klezmer.html

gilad--banner-sea-1

RPEdNew400

[Editor’s Comment: I want to add a few of my own thoughts on one of the main points contained in Gilad’s article below, i.e., “Jewish Exclusivity”. As Gilad puts it, in plain English, “Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist organizations are exclusive to Jews.” This is something that I’ve found out over years of attempts at trying to either join in Jewish forums or Jewish groups here in Canada who profess to be at odds with the Jewish state of Israel and its policies toward the Palestinian people. The last time, a few years back, I did get accepted into a discussion group but when I mentioned Gilad’s name in a discussion I was unceremoniously given the boot. Prior to that time I had made other friendly overtures to similar groups with no positive results. 

The most recent creation by the Jewish ‘left’ here in Canada is the Independent Jewish Voices Canada (IJV) organization. I signed up for their mailing list and periodically receive notices, most recently dealing with the Gaza debacle. Inevitably they present themselves as “progressives” which is the tell-tale sign that they are Jewish in nature and control. They also appear on the leading edge of initiatives that they themselves have created but which always tend to push whatever their agenda happens to be. A recent example is the following:

Screen Shot 2014-08-29 at 10.15.10 AM

It all sounds to open and free and positive but just try to contact the folks at IJV and receive a reply from them. It ain’t a gonna happen. It’s a one-way street and all roads lead back to this same “Jewish exclusivity” that Gilad Atzmon describes so well in his article. I would be absolutely floored if I was to find that there were Goyim members of the Board of Directors of the IJV here in Canada. But simply posing the question to them would be construed as being “anti-Semitic” and “un-progressive” and unacceptable.

It’s endemic throughout all countries I would imagine and that attitude only serves to reinforce the commonly accepted view that Jews aren’t to be trusted or relied upon to be cooperative members of any ad hoc organization that opposes the Zionist agenda of Israel and the global Rothschild elites who now control much to much of the world’s power and resources.]

—————

 

 Atzmon_defamation_League

CHASED BY A KLEZMER 

THURSDAY, AUGUST 28, 2014

By  GILAD ATZMON

I am amused that as the Zionist smear campaign against me and my work has faded, the so called Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists, A.K.A AZZ (anti Zionist Zionists), are ever more infuriated by my thoughts.  They are desperate to silence me. They don’t have a chance, but, let’s face it, they have some really good reasons.

The recent events in Palestine have proved beyond any doubt my interpretation of Jewish nationalism and Jewish identity politics. It is not a coincidence that I was the only one to predict the Israeli defeat  even before the first Israeli soldier entered Gaza. Since Israel defines itself as the Jewish State, its actions and atrocities must be understood within the context of Jewish culture and heritage. This is my line of thought and this is what I am known for.

Leading commentator, Jeff Blankfort, argued recently that the Jewish Left is not the solution, it is actually a continuation of the problem. I believe that the Jewish Left is not merely a continuation of the problem, it is actually at the heart of the problem. Jewish power, as I see it, is the capacity to silence criticism of Jewish power. In that regard, AIPAC and the Jewish Lobby are not ‘Jewish power,’ they are symptoms of Jewish power. The institutional attempt to silence any debate about Jewish power is provided by the Jewish Left and the so called Jewish anti Zionist network (JVP, Mondowiess, Chomsky, Blumenthal, etc.). It is the Jewish Left that attempts to set the boundaries of the discussion and dictates what can and cannot be said.

For instance, we may talk about Zionism and Israel but we must never elaborate on the Jewishness of the Jewish state. Israel defines itself as the Jewish State, it attests to its affinity to Jewish history, and it draws its vile inception from the Old Testament, yet, the Jewish pro Palestinian outlet Mondoweiss, changed its comment policy to ban discussion of Jewish culture in the context of criticizing Israel.  To sum it all up, I am not just an anti Zionist, I am actually critical of all forms of Jewish politics, both Zionist and Anti. I contend that all forms of Jewish politics are ethno-centric and to a certain extent, racially driven. And in my latest book The Wandering Who I substantiate this point and yet to see any attempt to prove me wrong.

In the last few days I have came across several attempts to defame me. I am cheered by each of them. I tend to see these attempts as an acknowledgment of the importance of my contribution to the discourse.

Earlier today I read a clumsy diatribe  written by Nick Cooper, a Jewish ethnic campaigner as well as a Klezmer artist from Texas. In his article, Why Other Critics of Israel Won’t Work With Gilad Atzmon Anymore, Klezmer Cooper engages in a Dershowitz like cherry-picking exercise but, instead of exposing me, he conveniently provides us with an example of morbid Jewish Left ideology and tactics.

Ali Abunimah Did Ask Me To Lie

Cooper is convinced that my words are too often “defamatory, inaccurate, and self-aggrandizing.” He accuses me of “fabricating” a statement by Ali Abunimah. Cooper quotes a line of mine from an email exchange.  “Abunimah,” I wrote,  “calls Israelis Zionists because he needs the so called Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists to support his operation. The last time I communicated with Ali Abunimah he wrote to me, ‘Just refer to Zionism instead of Jewish identity and everything would be fine’. He basically asked me to lie.. I obviously refused’…”

If Cooper bothered with even minimal research he would find out that Mr Abunimah admitted that he sent me a message along this exact line. The email is available on Ali Abuimah’s web site:

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/response-recent-efforts-cast-me-racist


From: Ali Abunimah

November 30, 2010 at 5:16 pm

Dear Gilad, I appreciate your note… What you describe as “Jewish” might perhaps be more accurately described as “Zionist,” – and then we might find grounds for a lot of agreement..

Rather than ‘fabricating’ Abunimah’s words, I described his embarrassing non- ethical offer pretty accurately. 

Jewish Exclusivity

Klezmer Cooper is correct in claiming that in our correspondence I told him that he wasn’t intelligent enough to grasp the relatively simple argument that Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist organizations are exclusive to Jews. No doubt, Jewish organizations are happy to collect subscription fees from Goyim (gentiles). But can a Goy become the secretary of Jewish Voice for Peace or the spokesperson for the Jewish Anti-Zionist Network? Not really, and why? Is it because the Goyim aren’t racially qualified or is it because they are ethnically unfit for the job?  The answer should be embarrassing to the Jewish Left, as it seems even the Israeli Knesset is more tolerant than Western Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist organizations.

Truthfulness

Cooper is also correct that I see “Jewish exclusivity everywhere.” And I further contend that Jewish anti-Zionists are a ‘racially oriented exclusivist culture driven by chosenness.’ But in order to prove me wrong  Cooper argues that  “Anti-Zionist Jews often have non-Jewish partners.”  If Cooper were familiar with Jewish heritage and culture he would know that those ‘partners’ are tagged within the tribal discourse as ‘Sabbos Goyim’- Gentiles who toadie to the every wish and whim of the Jews, especially in politics. Cooper is even kind enough to provide us with a list of his favourite Sabbos Goyim. They are all there at the bottom of his article. Arab sounding names first, English names later, for Sabbos Goyim are set in a hierarchic manner based on the primacy of Jewish interests.

Killing Christ on a daily Basis

Cooper accuses me of racism, but there is one thing he forgets to do; produce a single reference made by me in which I criticize Jews as a race or ethnicity.

“Gilad compared the Israeli attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla to the killing of Jesus,” Cooper writes. I did and would do it again! But is this racism? In the last 5 weeks I have interpreted Israeli crimes in Gaza in the light of Christ killing. Is it racist? Not at all! The murder of Christ symbolizes the killing of the innocent. As far as I am aware this is exactly what the Jewish State has done in turning Gaza into a pile or rubble and murdering children, women, elders and medical workers.

But Chirst Killing also embodies the killing of the messenger. Isn’t that exactly what Nick Cooper attempts to do in struggling to silence me in such a transparently deceitful fashion?

Cooper writes, “Invoking the Christ Killer slur invokes past centuries of anti-Jewish racism and violence in Europe and the US.” I would suggest to Cooper and other Hasbara merchants  that if Israel were to stop killing innocent people in Palestine in the name of the Jewish people, that would be a very useful tactic in combating the ‘Christ Killer’ slur.

Distortion of truth 

Klezmer Cooper writes at the end of his piece, “Several years ago, I collaborated with Gilad Atzmon on the Klezmer Musicians Against the Wall Compilation CD”

This is simply not true. I have never collaborated with Cooper. His playing wasn’t in line with my standards (Cooper owns a drum set). I allowed Cooper to use a few tunes from my parody album “Artie Fishel and The Promised Band” – a comical musical project that mocks Klezmer music and Jewish identity politics, on his Klezmer compilation. Cooper was obviously too dim to grasp that Artie Fishel was a spoof character mocking the Coopers of this world.

Watch Artie Fishel (on Jazz in my Jihad)  http://youtu.be/oCJ4De0POGs

Screen Shot 2014-08-29 at 9.37.11 AM

Back To The Ghetto

I understand Cooper’s frustration as much as I understand his fear. The popularity of my criticism of Jewish identity politics is well established by now. It has been endorsed by the greatest scholars and commentators ever associated with the solidarity movement.

If Jewish activists and Klezmers alike want to be part of a true solidarity movement, they better sneak out of the ghetto and join a universal discourse. I don’t hold my breath for that to happen any time soon.

——–

Liberal Party of Canada: Just another Jew-controlled Zio Puppet of Israel

Liberals on Gaza

 

Statement by Liberal Party of Canada Leader Justin Trudeau on the situation in Israel and Gaza

POSTED ON JULY 15, 2014

OTTAWA – The Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Justin Trudeau, today issued the following statement on the situation in Israel and Gaza:

“The Liberal Party of Canada strongly condemns Hamas’ rejection of the Egyptian ceasefire proposal and its rocket attacks on civilians.

“Israel should be commended for having accepted the ceasefire proposal, and demonstrating its commitment to peace. The Liberal Party of Canada, and many in the international community including the United States, the U.N. Security Council, and the Palestinian Authority, had urged a ceasefire that could have ended the tragic civilian loss of life in Gaza and the suffering of Israelis under terrorist attack.

“Israel has the right to defend itself and its people. Hamas is a terrorist organization and must cease its rocket attacks immediately.”

RPEditor400

Editor’s Commentary:

Well? Did any really expect that Justin Trudeau, leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, would opt for the truth and for real justice and show some moral fibre and stand up for the Palestinian people who are being sacrificed on the alter of Zionism as I write.

Sometime ago I already learned that Trudeau had sold his soul (and the soul of every Liberal in Canada) to the devil (Israel) when it was revealed that the Jews were running and financing the Liberal Party’s campaign.

But then this has always been the Zionist Jews’ modus operandi when it comes to elections. Having control of all the money supply it’s not a problem for them to place their bets on every major contender in any political campaign. That way they never lose and always end up controlling whatever sell-out lackey it is that’s willing to set aside their morals and their humanitarian principles and do the bidding of their Jew overlords who footed the bill, at least until the new puppet government gains control and the nation’s taxpayers face the pay back in one form or another.

No political party here in Canada to date (with the exception of the Canadian Action Party) has spoken out against the Zionist Jew state of Israel’s despicably disgusting slaughter of the defenseless Palestinian people. Instead, like a bunch of brain-dead zio-indoctrinated zombies they stand mute as Israel bombs and blows to bloody bits Palestine’s babies and mothers and fathers like psychos shooting fish trapped in a barrel and when it comes to action all we see is each of them prostrating and grovelling before Netanyahu and the Zionist psycho-killers and kissing their asses all the while calling the Palestinian victims “terrorists”.

Each time the Zionists go berserk Israel’s blood-lust goes further and their actions before the world become more macabre and mentally deranged yet all the while Canada’s so-called “leaders” refuse to stand up and call them to task for their viciously homicidal behaviour.

What we’re witnessing now on a daily basis is precisely the techniques used in the MKULTRA programs which were designed to fragment and destroy human emotions through grossly exaggerated demented behaviour thus allowing the perpetrators to gain greater and greater control and influence over their victims. We’re being forced (especially those who still watch the Jew media on a daily basis) into this psycho-fragmentation process against our will and still most people don’t even realize what’s happening to them. Insanity is becoming the norm and the insanest of them all are the Zionists.

We’re on the brink of plunging into an abyss of chaos and social mayhem if we don’t put a stop to both the Jew dominated media and Israel’s demented lust for blood and destruction. Anything short of that objective is pure fantasy and will only perpetuate the sanguinary and barbarous behaviour of these death eaters from the furthest depths of Hell.

—-

 

Harper Zionists seek to boost Canada thought crime law by Brandon Martinez

 http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/04/11/358120/zionists-to-boost-thought-crime-law/

Screen Shot 2014-04-11 at 10.38.06 AM

Screen Shot 2014-04-11 at 10.37.51 AM

Harper Zionists seek to boost Canada thought crime law

 By
Brandon Martinez
April 11th, 2014

 

The Zionist ruling clique of Canada, through their front-man Stephen Harper, is seeking to beef up the already-existing Orwellian “hate propaganda” law which has been primarily used to curtail criticism of Zionists and Israel.

The conspicuous change is buried in the Harper government’s proposed cyberbullying law, Bill C-13.

The existing law in Canada’s criminal code makes it illegal to “promote hatred” (whatever that means) of people “distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation,” explained The Chronicle Herald, but Bill C-13 intends to expand that category to include age, sex, mental or physical disability, and most disturbingly, “national origin.” In other words, you cannot criticize anyone for any reason at all!

This means, say, if you condemn Israelis for their inhumane treatment of Palestinians, you could find yourself in court facing down the self-appointed thought police and commissars of political correctness.

The … law against “hate speech” is illegitimate and ridiculous to begin with. The idea of allowing a government to legislate against opinions and feelings is patently absurd – it is pulled right out of George Orwell’s dystopian classic 1984.

British Columbia native Arthur Topham has felt the wrath of Canada’s censorious establishment. In November 2012, at the instigation of the Zionist society of B’nai B’rith, Topham was charged with a ‘hate crime’ for publishing anti-Zionist articles on his website RadicalPress.com.

One of the items on Topham’s site that made the Zionists convulse and contort with unrestrained anger and rage was a satire called Israel Must Perish. The text was nothing more than a spoof of a 1941 book authored by a Zionist … named Theodore Kaufman entitled Germany Must Perish! In that text Kaufman called for “a final solution” of German extinction. Topham merely substituted the words “German,” “Germany” and “Nazi” with “Israel,” “Jew” and “Zionist” throughout the text. Despite writing a clearly-worded preface explaining the satirical nature of the text, Topham was arrested by the RCMP and now faces the possibility of spending up to two years behind bars for violating Zionist sensibilities.

Many will recall the sad saga of German-Canadian publisher Ernst Zundel. In the mid-1980s Zundel was charged with “spreading false news” after he published a book, Did Six Million Really Die?, which questioned some aspects of the official “holocaust” story. In the ensuing show trial, Zundel and his team of revisionist historians as well as his indefatigable defence lawyer Douglas Christie brought the holocaust lobby to its knees with facts and information refuting many claims made by Zionists about Germany’s WW2 concentration camps.

Over the span of three decades, Zundel was dragged from courtroom to courtroom, from jail cell to jail cell, merely for expressing a viewpoint deemed verboten by the … Zionist establishment – the self-appointed architects of public discourse, the self-declared arbiters of truth and morality, the self-proclaimed “chosen people” whose faults are unseen and whose character is unimpeachable.

Zundel, a self-described pacifist with no criminal record, was physically assaulted on numerous occasions by Jewish Defence League thugs. His Toronto home, which also housed his publishing and graphic arts businesses, was bombed and torched by Zionist terrorists. He received death threats on a daily basis from members of the “chosen race of God,” but the Toronto Police did almost nothing to prevent any of it and was entirely uninterested in pursuing the criminals and thugs responsible for the campaign of terror against Zundel and his associates.

Zundel’s story is a testament to the power and control of Jewish extremists in Canada, whose agenda is anything but altruistic and whose disposition is more racist than the Klan.

In the “New World Order” being imposed on us by self-interested, ethnocentric megalomaniacs, no man has the right to explore, investigate and come to his own conclusions about history — that is the sole responsibility of the tyrannical monarchs of the NWO, who tell us what and how to think; free thought be damned.

BM/AB

Screen Shot 2014-04-11 at 10.41.06 AM

Brandon Martinez is a freelance writer and journalist from Canada whose area of expertise is foreign policy, international affairs and 20th and 21st century history. His writing is focused on issues such as Zionism, Israel-Palestine, American and Canadian foreign policy, war, terrorism and deception in media and politics. Readers can contact him at martinezperspective@hotmail.com. More articles by Brandon Martinez

 

Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws by Arthur Topham

BadMoonRisingHeader 800 copy 4

 

Bad Moon Rising: 

How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws

By 

Arthur Topham

“Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them,
I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and
beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
And everyone that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not,
Shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and
Beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.”
~ Jesus Christ, St. Matthew Ch. 7, vs 24 -27

 

My assertion, as stated in the title to this article, that Canada’s judicial system has been infiltrated and co-opted by foreign Zionist Jew lobby groups operating in Canada since 1919, will automatically be met with a loud hue and cry of “preposterous! outrageous!” followed immediately by much hand-wringing and declamations of “anti-Semitism”,”hate”,”racism” and further punctuated, dramatized and broadcast across the nation via the the Zionist-controlled mainstream media.

So be it. It doesn’t detract one iota from the facts. All such reactionary responses only reinforce the premise of my argument that Canada’s Zionist Jew media cartel is, and always has been, an integral part of their overall plan to formulate and establish Orwellian laws inimical to the rights and freedoms of the people. Frankly stated it’s the modus operandi of these foreign-controlled Jewish lobbies to react precisely in this fashion for that is how they mendaciously twist and stifle debate on any issue of national importance to Canadians; be it our Charter rights or our fundamental right (and responsibility as patriotic protectors of our country) to question the direction of the nation’s foreign policies which, under the current Harper regime, are deliberately replacing the nation’s longstanding principles of common sense and aligning our once relatively respected political ideals with the present agenda of the Zionist Jewish state of Israel, considered by most intelligent people to be the most rogue, racist, supremacist, violent, atheistic and apartheid nation on the face of the planet.

It’s my fervent contention that the template for Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” legislation was, from the start, designed in such a way as to function as a legal shield; a mechanism which the Zionist lobbyists use to defend themselves against any allegations aimed at exposing their covert actions; all of which are meant to benefit their inordinate influence over Canadian politics and the criminal actions of the foreign state of Israel; Harper, of course, being their current Trojan Horse, front man in this deliberate, ongoing, slow motion coup to capture the nation’s political and legal systems.

When we go back in history and retrace the steps that these legal interlopers have taken since the end of World War 2 it’s clearly evident what they’ve been up to, especially in light of the now increasing displeasure that more and more Canadians are showing toward the actions of the Jewish lobbies when it comes to their relentless, telling attacks upon our Charter of Rights and Freedoms which include our fundamental right to freedom of expression as stated in Sec. 2b of the Charter.

For those still unfamiliar with this fundamental right it states:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

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

All that’s required in order to verify this war against our rights and freedoms, including our most basic right of speaking out and expressing our views on issues vital to our national well being, is to delve into any and all of the legal cases over the past forty four years associated with the issue of freedom of expression and one will see immediately that in practically every instance the first special interest lobby group lining up and vying for intervenor status is inevitably a Jewish one. And furthermore, concomitant with their zealousness to intervene is usually the underlying fact that it is they themselves who were instrumental in bringing forth the charges. And if that isn’t the norm then they’re undoubtedly there to make sure that the complainant (usually an agent in one form or another) gets the maximum support of their power and influence in the courts and the media.

The foundation for all of this pretense and deceit was laid at the end of the last world war when the Zionist-controlled U.K. and USA began cranking up their deliberately orchestrated accusations that Hitler and the German military were guilty of having attempted to wipe out the Jews in Europe by gassing millions of them and then cremating the innocent souls in ovens to cover up their horrendously heinous crime. The Nuremberg Trials at the war’s end were the focus of these fantastic claims of willful genocide by gas and fire and the West, still mesmerized by the massive amounts of anti-German hate propaganda which they had been saturated with for the past six years, as well as being shell-shocked from all the fighting, killing, bombing and destruction, fell prey to this massive deception and was unwilling or unable to garner the moral fortitude or financial resources necessary to counter these outrageous lies of the powerful Zionist lobby.

Little did it matter that every confession by the captured German military commanders had been gained by torture. Little did it matter that the majority of those running the trials were of Jewish ethnicity. Little did it matter that laws which had been followed by nations for decades were suddenly revised in secrecy just prior to the war’s end and the former International Geneva protocols cast aside and new standards of jurisprudence abruptly introduced into the equation by Jewish judges and the Zionist forces who had gained firm control of the whole charade. This was the hour that they’d planned for and were awaiting since first declaring war on Germany in 1933 when Hitler and the National Socialist Party gained power through legal, democratic means.

Now that the Allies had gained their victory, the Zionists via subterfuge, deception, political pressure and the willing assistance of their controlled media and Hollywood, were finally in a position to have their long sought “6 Million Jewish Holocaust” footings poured, thus assuring themselves of a firm propaganda foundation for the erection of their fabricated phantasy; one that would then allowing for the rest of the subsequent monkey business of taking over and manipulating national and international laws, all of which was based upon their cunningly crafted pretext for tyranny known as the “Holocaust”.

After that landmark lie was accomplished it was merely a matter of time, patient plodding, and endless, inordinate propaganda and pressure placed upon the rest of the population of the world who had still to accept the “Holocaust” hoax and be subsequently convinced of the dire and urgent necessity for enacting legislation that would make it illegal to promote either “genocide” or “hatred” toward any identifiable group.

In principle (and of course based upon the lie of the “6 Million”) these proposals might have appeared laudable and worthy had the mythical “Holocaust” actually occurred and in that context they would most definitely have been noble pursuits to accomplish but that, unfortunately, wasn’t the reality. Only now that the real history of the last eighty years is finally coming to light, thanks to the free and open Internet, are we finally getting to see the original, unadulterated script as it was so cleverly designed by the Zionist forces of the day; a program of diabolic, Machiavellian political pragmatism designed to destroy democratic institutions and replace them with a Zionist-based illuminist, occult vision of a macabre New World Order where they, and only they, would hold all the power and control over the world’s people along with all the resources of the planet.

Such was the set and setting here in Canada when the Jewish lobbies started their underhanded campaign to create “Hate Propaganda” laws that would be and are being used against Canadian citizens today.

One might legitimately say that these deceptive measures to control freedom of speech actually began even before the commencement of WW2. After Hitler and the National Socialist Party came to power in 1933 the Jews in Canada were already growing fearful that Canadians might begin to believe what Germany was saying about the International financiers and the Jewish control of their own beleaguered nation and so in the province of Manitoba, (of all places) the government passed a statute to combat what was apparently perceived to be a “rise in the dissemination of Nazi propaganda”. The premise of which (The Libel Act, R.S.M. 1913, c. 113, s. 13A (added S.M. 1934, c. 23, s. 1) was later to become The Defamation Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. D20, s. 19(1) and was in all likelihood the first volley launched against freedom of expression.

Up until 1970 Section 181 of the Criminal Code, which reads: “Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.” was the only provision in the Code even remotely connected to the offence of group defamation but it didn’t, at the time, specifically make mention of “hate propaganda”.

As stated above, when WW2 ended the work of the Zionist lobbyists began in earnest when their “Holocaust” card began appearing as the foundational pretext to any and all discussions surrounding “human rights” and “discrimination”. The first step in the direction of censorship was the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 with its references to “hate propaganda” and by 1953 we find that the Canadian Jewish Congress was already diligently pursuing efforts toward this end with their attempt to insert anti-hate propaganda provisions into the Criminal Code which was being revised in that same year.

Their deceptive labours eventually bore fruit when the lobby was finally able to convince Canada’s federal Justice Minister Guy Favreau in 1965 to appoint a special (interest) committee to look into the purported “problems” connected with the dissemination of “hate propaganda” in Canada.

Surprisingly (not) what became known as “The Special Committee on Hate Propaganda in Canada” and later abbreviated (for propaganda purposes) to the “Cohen Committee” was headed by a Jewish lawyer, Dean Maxwell Cohen, Q.C., Dean of the Faculty of Law, McGill University. While not all members of the committee were Jewish there was one other notable lawyer instrumental in aiding the Jewish lobby in their relentless quest for censorship laws. This was none other than Professor Pierre E. Trudeau, Associate Professor of Law, University of Montreal, soon to become Canada’s Prime Minister.

The committee studied the alleged “problem” from January 29th to November 10th, 1965 and their conclusions called for new legislation that ultimately affected the Post Office Act, the Customs Act, and most critically in today’s context, what is now Section 319 of the Criminal Code, the very same section that’s being used to shut down RadicalPress.com and threaten its Publisher and Editor (me) with a possible two year jail sentence for having expressed opinions and facts on Zionism, Jews and the state of Israel.

My case is designed to be the test case for the Jewish lobbyists working in Canada. Should they win and find me guilty under Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada then that precedent will undoubtedly unleash a flood of subsequent attacks upon the rest of the bloggers and publishers and writers and artists living in Canada who also see an imminent threat to their freedom of expression encapsulated in this draconian, Marxist legislation designed with malicious forethought to censor truth and stymie any and all attempts to achieve and maintain justice and freedom of speech in Canada.

Conclusion:

Just as the great parable of Jesus Christ regarding the foolish man who built his house upon the sand has come down through history so too has the foolish attempt by those who call themselves Jews to build an occult house of invisible governance upon the sands of deception, usury and an insatiable lust for power and control over their fellow mortals.

Now that the rains of the peoples’ outrageous indignation and the floods of perceived injustice and repression of personal freedoms and the winds of Truth and Freedom are beginning to beat with greater and greater intensity upon the once mighty and powerful House of Zion (thanks to the miracle of the Internet), the underpinnings of this deceptive, age-old hoax are giving way and, should the people continue to unite and persevere in their staunch resistance to and abolition of all the “Hate Propaganda” laws now being used against them then soon, and with great relief and thankfulness, will come the fall of this House of Horrors and a new beginning for those who want only peace and love and justice and brotherhood to reign supreme.

—-

 

The Jewish Gas Chamber Hoax

jewish-gas-chamber-hoax-holocaust-medium

 

http://www.gaschamberhoax.com

Editor’s Note: One of the primary responsibilities of the alternative news media is to publish information that the mainstream media consistently conceals from the general public in order to keep the masses of listeners and viewers ignorant of historical events which, were the whole truth known, would radically alter peoples’ perception of world events. 

No greater hoax of the 20th century exists than that of the supposed “Jewish Holocaust of 6 Million Jews” in German labour camps such as Auschwitz and Treblinka and numerous other camps where Jews and thousands of other non-Jews were sent to labour for the German war effort. 

This website, www.gaschamberhoax.com is one place where an impartial viewer can watch and listen to some of the accounts of supposed “survivors” of the “death camps” and what they purport to be evidence that Jews were actually gassed and burnt in ovens by the millions.

Alain Soral and Gilad Atzmon on Jewish Power and cultural narcissism Interview by Alimuddin Usmani

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/alain-soral-and-gilad-atzmon-on-jewish-power-and-cultural-na.html

Alain Soral and Gilad Atzmon on Jewish Power and cultural narcissism

Saturday, March 8, 2014  Gilad Atzmon

An Interview by Alimuddin Usmani 

Translated by Romain Redouin

Alain&Gilad

 

 (http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr)

 

“The real meaning of Jewish Power is the capacity to silence the discussion of Jewish power”

~ Gilad Atzmon

 

Alain Soral and Gilad Atzmon have each faced (and perhaps welcomed) criticism and controversy as a result of their intellectual inquiries  and honest reasoning. Neither man has shied away from politically incorrect observations including  those on issues of Zionism, culture, Europe or freedom of speech.

How  did you get to know each other?

 AS: I first got to know  Gilad through his  music. I am a jazz lover  and have long appreciated Gilad who is an internationally known and admired  musician. Gilad also played with Robert Wyatt who has been my favorite musician since I was 16.

Gilad and I met in person two years ago at the Paris Book Fair. He was there to finalize the contract of his latest book, “The Wandering Who?” which is co-published by my publishing company, Kontre Kulture.

I am blown away by Gilad’s courage  and lucidity. By culture and experience I have seen that those Jews who are able to tear the veil of tribalism to reach the  authentic universal are very rare, although they are always the best!

GA: Soral published one of the two French editions of my latest book, “The Wandering Who.” I met him at  the Paris book fair 2 years ago and in spite of the language barrier between us, I have managed to learn a lot from him. Soral is one of the last European intellectuals. And it is far from surprising that the Left is outraged by his profound political and ideological insights.

For quite a while those who oppose, satirize or criticize the domination of the Zionist lobby within French politics and media, seem to be subject to political abuse and judicial persecution. Why do you think the Zionist elite choose to target France in particular?

AS: It should be noted first that France has, or suffers from – depending on your point of view –  what is by far the largest Jewish community in Europe, with nearly 700,000 members, while  Italy or Spain, for example, have about  40,000. The pressure and the influence of this very organized  community on French power and policy are inevitably proportional to its size.

There are also some historical components that are particular to France: France prides itself on being the country of human rights, it was the first nation to emancipate the Jews of Europe, it had the Dreyfus affair, the maintained guilt of Petainism, the Zionism of the Fourth Republic, the dominance of the Grand Orient masonry on the supposedly French socialist left … These are some of the many factors that  give our “organized Jewish community” as it defines itself, its effective and overwhelming position of moral watchdog.

GA:  I think that the Jewish Lobby is particularly forceful in France as a result of the impact of the ’68 student revolution. French society has been broken into a multitude of identity groups, and the more broken a society is, the more it tends to subscribe to Jewish politics. The reason is simple. After 3000 years of tribal exilic operation, the Jewish intelligencia is the most advanced in identity sectarian politics and cultural manipulation.

The gist of identity politics is an attempt to transform the cohesive host nation into a myriad of godless synagogues.  To some extent, Soral and Dieudonné have managed to unite what is left of the French working class; which includes Muslims,  Arabs, Blacks and  Whites. And as we have seen, the Jews and the Socialists see this development as an imminent danger.

A controversial anti-immigration initiative won the backing of the Swiss electorate on February 9. EU politicians reacted harshly, some even  threatened  Switzerland. For its part, the State of Israel continues to enforce an immigration policy based  solely on the criteria of Jewish ethnicity, without receiving any criticism from the EU. How should we interpret this discrepancy?

AS: I think one of the best definitions of power, for those who have ceased to harbor illusions of democratic equality is: “Give to yourself and yourself alone the right to do the opposite of what you brutally require from others”.

The Zionist Jewish community, which dominates the Western discourse,  requires the goyim to behave as men of the left: anti-racist and anti-nationalist … While they themselves behave as far right-wing men through their shameless support of a country (Israel) which is openly racist and ultra-nationalist.

GA: It is very simple. As much as  Jewish intelligencia, wants to break the host nation, to dismantle its cohesive narrative, and debase the patriotic impetus, the Jewish State is committed to Jewish interests that represent the complete opposite of the ideology it espouses. Israel defines itself as the Jewish State and  it subscribes to a racist, expansionist, nationalist and patriotic ideology.  This may seem to be a discrepancy, but in fact it isn’t.

The above dual ethic is actually engraved in Jewish emancipation philosophy.  The Jewish Haskala (enlightenment) motto that is mistakenly attributed to Moses Mendelssohn  instructs  the Jew- “be a Jew in your tent and a man on the street.” It teaches the Israelite to behave as a Jew at home but, while in the street to pretend to be a goy. This  perplexing dishonest dualism  (one lies to God at home while misleading the Goy in the street) explains the contradiction between the Jewish intelligencia call for diversity in the West, on the one hand, and the adherence to hard core patriotism in the Jewish State, on the other hand. The Jewish Haskala dual existential mode allows a clear distinction between the ‘Goyim universe’ and the ‘Jewish ghetto.’  In practice, Jewish intellectuals would teach  the Goyim about diversity and tolerance, yet defend  vile Judeo-centrism at home, i.e., Israel.

The expression “Judeo-Masonic conspiracy” is mainly used to discredit those who criticize the bond between the Masonic and the Zionist network. Is it possible to demonstrate this bond without being locked up in a “reductio ad hitlerum”?

AS: No. The term “Judeo-Masonic Plutocracy” has cradled all the 30’s far-right discourse, so it’s now an unusable phrase.

Yet, it is enough to look at the claimed alliances currently in in the mondialist process to objectively determine that international finance, the Masonic networks and Zionism are openly working in concert to impose on us their unequal vision and domination.

GA:  For a long time I have suggested that there are no hidden conspiracies in the Jewish world – all is done in the open. I strongly suggest that instead of looking for conspiracies under the carpet, we learn to analyze mainstream news. Everything is there and in the open. In fact I argue that the real meaning of Jewish Power is the capacity to silence the discussion of Jewish power. To look for the ‘hidden agenda,’ in that context, is to surrender to Jewish power. We must do the opposite. Look into the work of George Soros, AIPAC, CRIF, CFI, Lord Levy, Wall Street, etc.

Finally what is your reaction to the strategic coalition conducted by Lebanese Hezbollah with Christendom?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlXek4xQd381

AS: The utmost respect.

Facing the “clash of civilizations” strategy advocated by the American-Zionists, the transcurrent alliances – Middle-class/Proletariat but also Christians/Muslims – are the only solution. It took years of civil war for the Lebanese to understand this and I just hope we will not have to go that far in this disaster in France, in order to embark on this path of wisdom.

GA: I guess that such an inevitable coalition is what torments the Jewish intelligencia as inspired by the Frankfurt School to operate forcefully against the so -called ‘patriarchal West.’ It is  possible that  true diverse humanism (as oppose to ‘diversity’)  poses the ultimate danger to Jewish cultural narcissistic chauvinism.  In true diverse humanism, we’re all united in our search for the ethical and the universal, we revert to Athenian thinking and oppose the Bernard Henri Levis and the rest of the Jerusalemite cantors.

——-

The War Against Jazz Musician Trevor LaBonte by Gilad Atzmon

WaronTrevorL 700 copy

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/the-war-against-trevor-labonte.html
The War Against Trevor (LaBonte)

Screen Shot 2014-03-04 at 6.29.44 PM

Gilad Atzmon interviews Trevor Labonte

Monday, March 3, 2014

By Gilad Atzmon

Until two years ago, Trevor LaBonte was one of the most successful Jazz artists in Texas. He had been performing every night and in the most prestigious venues. He was the first-call guitar player for many of Austin’s prominent musicians. But then it all changed.

Gilad Atzmon: Trevor you were a local Jazz hero, what happened?

Trevor LaBonte: An activist named Craig Berlin, owner of Pro-Tape Staff in Austin, organized a campaign  to destroy my career by terrorizing the entire Austin music community. He creates Facebook posts in which he tags 50 or 60 important people in town, and reports to them that I am a ‘Nazi,’ an ‘Anti-Semite,’ and a ‘holocaust denier.’ Berlin demands that everyone must do everything in their power to make sure I never play another note in public. At first, most people ignored him, but  then others took up his cause, including the radio DJ Andy Langer from KGSR, helping to make sure I have become a hate figure and completely ostracized.

Screen Shot 2014-03-04 at 1.46.07 PMhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ulpNWaHYpfQ

Gilad: Let me understand correctly, you didn’t publish a book or even an article, all that vile campaign against you was launched because you expressed some thoughts on your own Facebook page? Is it correct?

Trevor: Yes, that’s what happened.

Gilad: How have your friends reacted to this onslaught?

Trevor: They are confused and afraid, mostly. Many of them quietly agree with at least some of what I say, and they are still friends with me. But understandably, they are scared to be listed in a performance announcement with me, since they would be certain to draw the hissing and screeching and boycott of Craig Berlin’s fans. Most of my friends are sad and just want to play music together. Anyone who tries to stick up for me, or just moderate the witch hunt against me,  risks being similarly attacked themselves. And the attacks are vile. Musicians are not used to being vilified for unusual opinions.

Gilad: I guess that it would be correct to argue that the entire Jazz community is strictly speaking terrorized by this Jewish campaign to ostracize you.

Trevor: Many of the musicians in Austin are Jewish and are among my friends. The campaign against me  is being orchestrated by about 10 Jewish people who have publicly agreed amongst themselves that I have fallen ‘gravely mentally ill’, must be taken immediately to a ‘psychiatric institution’ and be ‘heavily dosed with meds.’

Gilad: This sounds familiar.

Trevor: One  recommend that I be castrated by a chainsaw.

Gilad: This is clearly more radical treatment than the traditional rabbinical circumcision apparatus.

Trevor: There were many other violent threats and fantasies, which are an interesting and revealing response to my mission statement: I advocate universal human rights and opposition to supremacism, violence and corruption of all forms, Jewish, Christian or otherwise. I also believe in the free exchange of ideas and free speech.

Gilad: I have now met your beautiful and kind girlfriend and your lovely parents. I saw a lot of fear, it seems that everyone around you is subject to harassment by Berlin and his defamation troopers, I even learned from venue owners that they were harassed by Berlin and his clan. Have you ever spoke to Craig? Did you meet him?

Trevor: We have only communicated briefly on Facebook. He keeps me blocked now, so I can’t even see what he is saying about me, let alone defend myself. I have no choice except to just let him go crazy for the world to see. I hope this demonic ranting  helps people to understand the rampant madness raging in such obsessed minds.

Gilad: I obviously looked at the accusations against you and they are indeed vile. You are quoted questioning on FB  “If Hitler was an evil dictator, then why did he have broad public support? Why did Germany love him so much?” This is obviously a legitimate and valid question.

However when I visited your FB page I realized that you push it a bit further, you question the Holocaust official narrative. You ask “what about those ‘gas chambers?’ Where are they? Why were they never found?”

Trevor, do you realise that such questions are banned in European countries? Why do you think there is an attempt to stop Holocaust revisionism? Why are you chased, what are they afraid of?

Trevor: Yes, I realize Holocaust revisionism is banned in 17  countries. But America is not one of them. Americans need to use their right to free speech to question traditional history of all kinds. The Holocaust is no different in that respect.

Gilad: You have also suggested that Jews were highly involved with Bolshevism.  Truth can be offensive, but why is this the case?

Trevor: In this case, the truth is offensive to Jews because, were it to become widely known, their whole narrative of history would have to change. The fact  is that Bolshevism was largely a Jewish supported cause.

Gilad: I am not a supporter of Bolshevism nor am I a Marxist, but I would simply argue that Jews used their dominance within the Bolshevik movement in order to promote their ethnic interests. I would agree that Jewish Bolsheviks carried on an element of Judeo centric supremacist righteousness.

Trevor: I asked if Jews ran some of the camps of Gulag Archipelago because they harbored deep racial animosity toward the Russian people. I often like to phrase things as questions, and my intent is to get a historical and intellectual conversation started. Yes, they are pointed questions, and my goal is to lead to the conclusions I have reached. More importantly, I want  people to question traditional versions of history. It’s a very painful process, for me as well as for others, I am sure. I was shocked and upset to learn that 85% of the Bolshevik/Communist government were actually Jewish, something I did not know because it is not taught in any history class. How can Hitler be seen as the greatest mass-murderer of all time, when practically next door, people like Trotksy/Leiba Bronstein, Lazar Kaganovich, and Gengrich Yagoda were running completely amok? The title of worst mass murderer has many competitors.

Gilad: What is the solution?

Trevor: I think the best solution would be to discard our “political correctness” standards. We should be able to question any historical or political narrative.  That’s the first amendment and I think it was created to allow difficult discussions exactly like these.  This is the only way we can start to approach the “truth” in history. No group, including Jewish people, should be allowed to control history.  In the south, we have not controlled the history of the Civil War and I also think that’s a good thing.

Gilad: Thanks for your time Trevor. I would urge my readers and followers to contact Craig Berlin and to demand that he stop his hate campaign against you at once.  I am pretty sure that the tide will change soon. I had an incredible time staying with you and playing music together. However, for the first time I met a musician who was more outspoken than myself. In fact, never before have I had trouble because of the views of one of my band members. This was pretty funny and a very positive development indeed.

——

Two Young Canadian Journalists Discuss Zionism’s Negative Effect on Canada and Elsewhere

Screen Shot 2014-02-28 at 9.38.32 PM Click on the link below to listen to the discussion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM1Sa_uA_DA&feature=youtu.be

Fighting for Zion and the Freedom to Brainwash Canadians with Ezra Levant by the Radical Press Parody Dept.

RadPressEditorNew1 150

[Editor’s Note:

The first thing that comes to mind when I think of Ezra Levant is the word hypocrite. A self-chosen champion of “freedom of speech” this big mouthed bigot loves telling his dumbed down goy followers how he’s fighting for their right to free expression while all the while he’s suckering them in for donations to cover his court costs incurred by his own vicious acts against Canada’s Muslim community that have gotten him in the legal hot water he’s now stewing in.

Just like his Zionist cohorts in the Zionist controlled news media Levant has spent years spewing forth his hatred toward the Muslims following the old, worn-out agenda of Israel to get the Christian nations of the west battling with the Arab nations of the Middle East so the Jews themselves can sit back and rake in the money spent on armaments and military loans and watch the stupid goy murder each other out of ignorance.

This is the same bigot who, when the Crown finally laid charges against me for “promoting hatred against people of the Jewish faith” back in November of 2012, rather than defend my freedom to express my opinions on political issues here in Canada, chose instead to vilify my name and my work on the Sun News Network by libelling and defaming my person and spouting off all sorts of blatant lies about me on a media reaching around the globe.

Now that he’s been caught up in his own web of lies and deception and he finds himself in the legal hot seat he’s crying the blues and asking Canadians to stand by him and support him and pay his bills so that he’ll be able to continue shooting his yap off on tv and calling down the Muslims and the Indians and the rest of Canadians who happen to stand in the way of these psychopaths getting their way in whatever criminal action they choose.

Here is a prime example of his bigoted brain at work. On his please help poor me blogsite Levant posts the following notice about the person who’s taking him to court, accusing him of practising “the soft jihad of ‘lawfare’, which he defines as “the abusive practice where lawsuits are filed against critics of radical Islam just to harass them and silence them….”

Screen Shot 2014-02-23 at 12.05.15 AM

Just stop for a moment and think about that. This is precisely what the Zionist Jew lobby groups here in Canada have been doing against their fellow Canadians for the past sixty years now. It’s been lawsuit after lawsuit laid against Canadians who’ve been critical of the racist, apartheid, criminal actions of the supremacist state of Israel and never once did we see Levant or any of his fellow Jew bigots ever stand up for these people. Never. In fact the Jew lobby groups like B’nai Brith Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress and now the newly formed treasonous organization the Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs are the major antagonists involved in trying to shut up the whole goddam country so that only they will be able to lie and cheat and deceive the country into doing whatever they decide we, the people, ought to do for them.

Then this brash psycho bigot attempts to convince the gullible people of Canada that he’s being “targeted” because of his last seven years fighting for “freedom of speech” and now he needs their help when in truth, he’s spent the last seven years and longer calling down and abusing and slandering the real freedom fighters here in Canada like the late Doug Christie and Ernst Zundel and Doug Collins and the many other non-Jew individual bloggers and publishers and writers who’ve been abused and jailed by the likes of these two-faced duel-citizen Jew lobbyists who only have their home and native land of Israel in mind whenever they attempt to take away the rights of normal Canadians such as myself. It’s these very same Jew organizations that have been on my ass for the past seven years and when did we ever see or hear the bigot Levant take a stand on my behalf? Never. Whenever my case did come up it was always Levant who was the first to sling the old bullshit epithets of the Zionists my way, calling me an “anti-Semite” and a “Jew-hater”, etc. Now he acts like he’s been the advocate of everyone here in Canada and fighting for all our rights.

Screen Shot 2014-02-23 at 12.06.39 AM

The big mouthed bigot has now come out with a newsletter that he’s sending out to all of those who he’s duped into believing that he’s going to be Canada’s shining knight and save us all from the censors. He’s calling it, “Fighting for Freedom”. Below you’ll see what I’m calling it in my parody of his first edition.]

Red spacer copy

EzraFF800 copy

Screen Shot 2014-02-22 at 5.27.14 PM

Welcome to the first edition of “Fighting for Zion” — my weekly newsletter! I’m using the e-mail address that someone said you once typed into a website similar to mine requesting to be signed up for just such a newsletter. If you don’t want to be on the list too bad, it won’t hurt my feelings as I’m used to blurting out all sorts of bullshit spam propaganda on the Sun News Network and on my own anti-Muslim/First Nations/Goyim hate show, “The Source” where I get to open my gaping flap-trap and call anyone and everyone down who may happen to be standing in the way of the Rothschild-controlled Zionist agenda for global take-over.

Of course that means ANYTHING that one of the cattle (i.e. “goyim” or non-Jew), happens to say which we can then use our Zionist controlled mainstream media to begin a smear campaign against so the rest of the herd of gullible Canadian goyim will start to see them them as either a “terrorist” or a “racist” or a “hate monger” or a “wing-nut” or an “anti-Semite” or a “neo-Nazi” or a “white supremacist” or “Jew-baiter” or…Jehovah forbid… a “holocaust denier” and a blatant committer of “hate crimes” and cringe in fear lest they also be accused!

But I hope you do stay subscribed because if you click “unsubscribe” on the link at the bottom it won’t work anyway and actually just adds your email to our list in Tel Aviv that my Mossad Jew controllers keep so they know precisely who it is that doesn’t wish to be a part of our glorious Jew World Order that we’ve been working so hard on now for the past couple of thousand years to achieve.

Once a week I’ll send you my favourite Sun newspaper pro-Zionist, praise Israel, praise Harper and bomb and kill the Palestinian kids columns plus a few of the most interesting videos from my TV show on the Scum News Network!

Speaking of my TV show I’m particularly proud of the one where I interviewed the late neo-Nazi, Zundel-loving, “Free Speech” lawyer Doug Christie just four months prior to his timely demise in March of 2013. I got to bad-mouth, lie, libel and slander that anti-Semite and Jew hating holocaust denier Arthur Topham who lives out in British Columbia and runs a “hate propaganda” site called www.RadicalPress.com. Of course he’s not alone out there as I know there are millions of other Jew-haters and Anarchists and neo-Nazis and Indian lovers and rednecks living out there who would just love to get their hands on God’s chosen ones and cram us all back into the ovens again but he was one of the more difficult to catch.

Screen Shot 2014-02-22 at 4.55.45 PM

We first tried back in 2007 when another of my fat, loud-mouthed friends from Victoria, B.C. (who works for the occult masonic covenant false front Jew lobby B’nai Brith Canada), used the now repealed Sec. 13(1) “hate crime” legislation that we’d slipped in to the Canadian Human Rights Code to get the Canadian Human Rights Commission to find him guilty and take down his website. But before it was able to all play out we found that Sec. 13(1) wasn’t all it was deviously made out to be and the Muslim terrorists here in Canada finally figured out a way to use it against us! Can you imagine that? Such chutzpah on their part to think that one of our very own specially created “hate crime” laws that we’d spent decades designing in order to censor and control the bleating of the sheep on the Internet here in Canada could be used agains US. That’s why we told Harper to get rid of it because then we’d be able to have the media all to ourselves (as we already do) and we could carry on brainwashing the dumbed down Canucks into believing whatever lies we decided to tell them just like we’ve always done.

Now of course all we have left in our arsenal of lies and dirty tricks is Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada which deals with “Hate Propaganda”. That was another law that we were able to pressure the gullible goyim politicians into putting in federal legislation. The only problem is it takes a lot more work to get a conviction because the cattle actually have recourse to certain self-defences which are built into the legislation and the pesky matter of “Truth” is still actually a defence yet, unlike what we had with the Sec. 13(1) weapon.

Our only real hope now is to use our Zionist controlled courts and judges and lawyers who have all sworn allegiance to our Rothschild-created “Crown” in the City of London, England aka Regina (Queen Elizabeth II) to carry on a protracted, expensive, onerous process of endless court appearances and phoney bail conditions that will tend to wear down our victims to the point where they either go broke and give up, flee the country or freak out and do something that we can then use to justify sending our mercenary RCMP forces to liquidating them with a bullet in the back of the head. That, of course, is our preferred method of controlling the goyim. It worked so well for us during our reign of terror in Russia but nowadays we have to be a bit more careful about using those old tried and true techniques and we only do so in dire circumstances like in the case of Greg Matters up in central B.C. where we had to stop him from exposing our links to pedophilia and murder and the crimes we committed in Bosnia.

Occasionally, I’ll also send you updates on other fights — like my upcoming Zionist Hate speech trial, that starts in Toronto on March 3rd. You can read about that at www.LieWithEzra.ca and while you’re there send me some big bucks so I don’t have to borrow the money from my fellow Zionists or spend any of my own earnings. The goyim are traditionally our cash cow (no pun intended of course) so let’s not break with these long standing customs. Why just ask the Germans how it works. They’ve been paying us billions of dollars in reparations for the past eighty years for a crime that never happened so I’m sure you Canadians can cough up a few shekels too in order to help out a poor, downtrodden Jew lawyer who’s being threatened with an economic pogrom by a raving Arab infidel who wants me to stop spreading lies about him and his faith.

Enjoy the newsletter — and keep watching the Zionist controlled Big Brother TV!

Yours for a Greater Israel and Internet Censorship for all Goyim,

Ezra Levant
Fighting For Zion
———————-

To unsubscribe click here (if you dare).

How Canada’s Zionist Lobby Controls the Harper Conservative Government by The Radical Press

ZionistLobbyControlHarper

RadPressEditorNew1 150

The Zionist lobby in Canada has an iron grip over the Harper Conservative government. Canadians have witnessed Stephen Harper and many of his cabinet ministers displaying a degree of transparent obeisance to the state of Israel far beyond any previous Prime Minister in our nation’s history.

The obvious question for Canadians is how a small group of Jewish duel-citizens numbering less that 2% of the population could wield such enormous influence over a federal government elected to represent Canada. PM Harper’s unabashed kowtowing to this rogue, apartheid state in the Middle East; one that has been breaking international laws since its inception in 1948, is a perplexing issue for many who don’t support the Zionist state or its treatment of the Palestinian people of Gaza and the West Bank.

The video below is an excellent study in how Britain’s Israeli Lobby works. I believe it’s safe to assume that all one witnesses in the very professionally done documentary can easily be applied to Canada and the USA as well.

Please pass this around to all you know who are dissatisfied with the Conservative government and its shameful and embarrassing behaviour on the international stage with regard to Israel.

 

Arthur Topham

The Radical Press

 

 

DispatchesVidClick HERE To watch video

or click on url below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0E70BwA7xgU

 

France’s Zionistas in Panic Mode as Nation Rises Up Against Jewish Plutocracy

Zionista Panic Hdr

http://www.vineyardsaker.blogspot.co.uk/

State repression in France only makes the Resistance grow stronger

Dieudonne’s music video and an appeal to French speakers (updated)

Dieudonne and his wife have made a small music video together which Dieudo put at the end of his latest web appearance.  I want to share this video with you:

Screen Shot 2014-02-08 at 11.15.15 PM

CLICK HERE TO VIEW VIDEO

Since Gallier2 has kindly translated the lyrics in a recent comment (merci l’ami!), I will also share that here:

A new wind blows over the planet, wind of renewal, it’s the wind of hope.
the one that makes the branches of the big trees dance, coming out of the night to awaken our souls.
It is born in the heart of the African forest. Dancing, slipping on the shores of the Congo river.
The wind of change, natural revolution, inspired by the stars or inspired by God.
It is here, I feel it, it wipes out my fears and strengthens my arms, it’s the wind of fight
for the emancipation of the black people and the yellows and the whites, for humanity.
A new wind blows over the planet, wind of renewal, it’s the wind of hope.
It opens our eyes and fills our hearts with the light and the faith, it’s the wind of joy.
And the chests are swelling and the fists are closing. Mister President lost his drive.
In the face of the shouting gun, the people gather. It’s him who advances and the king who retreats.
Everywhere the bullets whistle and death is close but I don’t tremble, I’m here standing still.
It’s over, we will live, not retreating, you can kill me and kill my family.
You will not be able to stop this wind, it has awakened us, the sun has risen.
It warms our hearts, make our children smile and turns off our fears, fills us with courage.
It’s the end of the lies, the begin of the march, we will not go back in obscurity…
A new wind blows over the planet, wind of renewal, it’s the wind of hope.
The evil one clings to the branches of his tree, resists stubbornly until losing his senses
No one resists the big wind of faith, either you bow or die Mister Liars
A new wind blows over the planet, wind of renewal, it’s the wind of hope.
Now I’m well, I breathe and I see. I feel and I believe in hope, in life.
The wind is still here, until when? I don’t know. Whatever we will see, it’s here and I believe in it
A new wind blows over the planet, wind of renewal, it’s the wind of hope.
A new wind blows over the planet, wind of renewal, it’s the wind of hope.

Lastly, I have also extracted the mp3 music track from the video and uploaded it to Mediafire to share it with you.  You can get that track here:

https://www.mediafire.com/?3ku4eihiu6afkp3

One more thing for the French speakers here – Alain Soral has recently released an absolutely amazing video about his latest public appearance.  Check it out here:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1abt94_conference-d-alain-soral-a-marseille-vers-l-insoumission-generalisee_news

I will be honest here – I cannot do that myself simply because of a lack of time.  But guys, if somebody could translate and subtitle his speech that would be an ideal way to make Soral better known to the English speaking world.  So if anybody of you could do it, please do and then upload the video somewhere and let me know and, of course, also let the folks at E&R know (email me if you need their email address).

As for me, I will write another post about Dieudo and Soral in the very near future.  Stay tuned.

Kind regards,

The Saker

‘”THE FRENCH ARE BUBBLING WITH RAGE!!!!”

Last November I wrote a piece entitled “Is a new revolution quietly brewing in France?” in which I described the struggle which was taking place between the French people and the Zionist plutocracy which has ruled France over the past decades (roughly since 1969) and today I am returning to this topic as events have rapidly accelerated and taken a sharp turn for the worse.  A number of most interesting things have happened and the French “Resistance” (I will use this collective designator when speaking of the entire Dieudonne/Soral movement) is now being attacked on three levels.

Intellectual level:

This is, by far, the most interesting “counter-attack”.  A well-known French commentator, Eric Naulleau, agreed to a “written debate” with Alain Soral in which both sides would discuss their differences and the transcript would be published in a book entitled “Dialogues Désaccordés” (which can roughly be translated as “detuned dialogs” or “dialogs out of tune” or even “disagreeing dialogs”).  To explain the importance of this publication I have to say a few words about Naulleau himself.

Screen Shot 2014-02-08 at 11.31.21 PM

Eric Naulleau

Everybody in France knows Eric Naulleau as one of the two partners of a “journalistic tag team” called “Naulleau and Zemmour” in which one of the partners – Eric Naulleau – is a Left-leaning progressive and the other – Eric Zemmour – is a Right-leaning conservative.  Together they form a formidable and, sometimes, feared team of very sharp and outspoken critics and commentators which was featured on various shows on French TV.  Zemmour, in particular, is an extremely intelligent and very charming person whose wonderful sense of humor combined with an outspoken attitude often got him in trouble.  He is one of the few French Jews who actually got sued by the notorious LICRA (rabid Zionist organization formed by Trotskyists to attack those opposing them) for daring to say “French people with an immigrant background were profiled because most traffickers are blacks and Arabs… it’s a fact” on TV.  Together, Naulleaua and Zemmour are known for being formidable debaters and very tough and even blunt critics who can take on pretty much anybody.

Naulleau explained that, according to him, it made no sense at all to ban Soral from the mass media because that still gave the option for Soral to record his show on the Internet where they would be viewed by millions of people (that is not an exaggeration, by the way, Soral’s videos do score more views that some national TV channels!).  Naulleau explained that in his videos Soral was always alone, free to say whatever he wanted, without anybody contradicting or challenging him and that his goal was precisely that – to unmask, challenge and defeat Soral in an open debate in which he would show all the fallacies and mistakes of Soral’s theses.  To say that Naulleau failed in his goal would be an understatement.  Soral absolutely crushed every single one of Naulleau’s arguments to the point where I personally felt sorry for Naulleau (whom I like a lot as a person).  Worse, not only did Soral absolutely obliterate Naulleau, he also made a prediction and said: “you will see the shitstorm which will hit you for agreeing to make this book with me!”.  And that is the crux of the disagreement between Soral and Naulleau: do the Zionists control the French media yes or not? Can they blacklist somebody or not?  Is there a shadow “Zionist censorship” in France or is public speech still free?  Soral’s thesis is that France is in the iron grip of a “behind the scenes” Zionist mafia which is exactly Naulleau vehemently denies.  The problem for Naulleau is that he proved Soral to be right.

The French media immediately attacked Naulleau for “providing Soral with a platform to spew his hateful theories” to which Naulleu logically replied that Soral was already doing so on the Internet and that, besides, he – Naulleau – did not believe in censorship but in a strong and free debate.  Naulleau also got attacked for not saying this or not saying that – in reality for getting so totally defeated by Soral in the debate. The book, by the way, became an instant bestseller which, indeed, made it possible for even more French people to think through Soral’s arguments and make up their own mind.  So, ironically, and even though Naulleau clearly wanted to challenge Soral, he did him a huge favor by allowing him to break the media blockade around his name – Soral is never ever invited on a talkshow – and by allowing the ideas of Soral to come right back into the public debate via this book, Naulleau de facto helped Soral.  Some have even speculated that Naulleau might be a secret sympathizer of Soral and that he did all of this deliberately.  I don’t believe that at all – Naulleau is sincere, and Naulleau is also naive: he is now only slowly coming to grips with the fact that Soral’s core thesis – that the Zionists completely control the French media – is a fact and that Soral’s prediction about Naulleau getting in trouble for this book was spot on.  Right now, Naulleau and his friend Zemmour still have a show on a small local TV station, but clearly Naulleau has now deeply alienated the French plutocracy.  As far as I know, nobody has dared to speak in Naulleau’s defense.  The funniest thing of all is that even though both Soral and Naulleau are officially coauthors of this book and even though Naulleau attempts to deny that Soral is blacklisted, only Naulleau got interviewed on the French talk shows, never Soral.  Not once.  What better way could there be to prove Soral right?

“Personalities lynch mob” level:

While Naulleau was trying to defend himself against attacks from all sides for daring to coauthor a book with Soral, something absolutely unprecedented took place: day after day after day, media personalities were shown on TV trashing Dieudonne and his “quenelle” gesture.  This really looked like a “virtual lynching” or a Stalinist trial – politicians, journalists, comedians, commentators, actors – you name it – all took turns to ridicule, insult, denounce and otherwise express their hatred for Dieudonne.  This truly became an Orwellian “two minutes of hate” in which Dieudonne was designated as the target of an absolutely vicious hate campaign.

Screen Shot 2014-02-08 at 11.32.08 PM

Bedos as “Dieudo Hitler Bin Laden”

A mediocre comedian named Nicolas Bedos was even given 12 minutes of uninterrupted air time to compare Dieudonne to both Hitler and Osama Bin Laden and his shows to a Gestapo interrogation room.  It was surreal, really.  If an extraterrestrial had just tuned in and watch this display of vicious hatred he would have imagined that Dieudonne was a 2nd Hitler about to invade France with a huge army of bloodthirsty Nazis.  For me, it was clear that the reason why all these different personalities were standing in line for the chance to outdo each other in taking a shot at Dieudonne was to prove their loyalty to the Zionist “deep-state”.  This was as transparent as it was sickening.  And again, it proved that Soral was right and that, if anything, he was under-estimating the degree of control of the Zionist plutocracy over France.

State level:

Finally, from being more or less covert, the persecution of Dieudonne and Soral by the French state became completely overt.  I already mentioned how in early January the French Minister of the Interior, Manuel Valls, used his powers to ban the latest show of Dieudonne (see here and here).  Over the last weeks, this repression has reached a new level with even more lawsuits against Soral (12 simultaneous lawsuits, see Google-translated list here) and administrative harassments (evening “visits” by bailiffs, abusive arrests, threats, police search of his small theatre in Paris) against Dieudonne.  All these events taken together – and it is really not hard at all to connect the dots – for a very clear picture: the power of the state is used to persecute, harass and repress Dieudonne and Soral.  And that, of course, just goes even further in proving that Soral is right in his central thesis about France being run by a shadow occupation “deep government” whose loyalties are not to the French people, but to the Zionist plutocracy and Israel.

The reaction against this state of affairs is also becoming stronger and the amount of people supporting Dieudonne and Soral has literally skyrocketed.  The reason for that is not only that a lot of French people share the same views as Soral and Dieudonne, but also a deep running French cultural tradition of admiring rebels and disliking the state.  Add to this that Hollande is the most hated President in French history and that the French economy is doing down the tubes triggering untold suffering and rage in the people suffering from the crisis, and you get a very explosive mix: the so-called “Day of Rage”.

Check out these videos before they are removed form YouTube (like this one):

Screen Shot 2014-02-08 at 11.14.10 PM

CLICK HERE TO WATCH VIDEO

 

Screen Shot 2014-02-08 at 11.14.25 PM

CLICK HERE TO WATCH VIDEO

 

Screen Shot 2014-02-08 at 10.52.45 PM

CLICK HERE TO WATCH VIDEO

 

Anybody who knows France well will tell you that this is very serious stuff because unlike other demonstrations which typically oppose a law, or a policy or a specific event, these demonstrators clearly are rejecting the legitimacy of the entire political system: they want regime change.  So far, the French media has tried to minimize the coverage of this event and the French elites are trying hard to pretend like this is some small, fringe, extremist group, which is utter nonsense.  France is bubbling with rage.

Zionist panic:

The Zionists are actually aware of that, and they are now in the panic mode.  Just take a look at the headlines of this Israeli-French website:

JSSnews-Dieudo-panic

 

On the top right, you can see the Israeli founder of this website – Jonathan-Simon Sellem and on the top left you see Arno Klarsfeld, a well-known “French” (Israeli/German/French) lawyer and rabid Zionist.  Here is what they are quoted saying:

Jonathan-Simon Sellem: “Dieudonne, you will never be a martyr.  You will not a hero.  Your name will be cursed in history, by history”.

Arno Klarsfeld: “They is a crucial moment in history: Jews are already beginning to leave France”.

Clearly, these two gentlemen see Dieudonne as some modern mix of Agag, Hamman, Titus, Hitler and Bin Laden – a terrifying, bloodthirsty and infinitely dangerous and evil man who threatens the survival of the Jewish race (never mind that Jews are not a race).

Could that be a little bit of an over-reaction?

What are these folks so terrified of?

I think that the answer is obvious: what they are so terrified of is not that Dieudonne and Soral will reopen Auschwitz somewhere near Paris, or that French Jews will be expelled from France.  They know that this is paranoia (which Gilad Atzmon calls “Pre-Traumatic Street Disorder”) is absolute crap: French Jews are safe, happy and welcome in France and nobody is seriously out there to do them any harm.  No, what this small clique of  Zionist Jews (representing a tiny fraction of the much more diverse French Jewry) really fears is that the truth about them and their power over the French deep-state will come out.  And this is not only about Jews.  There is a non-Jewish plutocracy formed around the Jewish core of French bankers and financiers which is also completely in bed with the Zionists and whose future depends on maintaining the Zionist control over France: politicians, of course, but also actors, journalists, academics, etc. – a full constellation of Shabbos Goyim willing to do Israel’s Sayanim’s dirty job for them.  It is this entire elite and the system which it built which is threatened by Soral and Dieudonne and by what the movement “Equality and Reconciliation” stands for: a union of all the French people (native or immigrants) which together are determined to resist the Zionist oppression of France and who, just as in WWII, will resist the occupier until the Liberation.

When and how could such a “Liberation” occur?

I don’t know.  These events are very complex and multi-dimensional and it is, I believe, impossible to predict what could happen.  What I am sure of, is that this movement, this Resistance, will not be crushed, nor will it somehow magically disappear.  To paraphrase the Communist Manifesto, the French people “have nothing to lose but their chains”: their country is ruined and they are ruled by an evil foreign occupier.  In terms of dynamics, every move which is made against Soral and Dieudonne only makes things worse for the occupation regime – the harder the strike, the harder the blowback.  The legitimacy of the regime, in particular, is greatly affected by such absolutely ridiculous actions like the “overkill” of a Minister of Internal Affairs using the highest court in the country (the State Council) in an emergency session to ban a single comedian’s stand up show.

Sure, for the time being most people in France comply, obey, or look the other way.  But everybody know, everybody understands and very few believe in the official lies, especially in the younger generation.

This all reminds me of the Soviet Union of the 1980s where externally nothing much was happening and where the system itself look ugly but safe.  Russians were making anti-Brezhnev jokes at private parties while the KGB from time to time arrested dissidents.  But nobody – not even the KGB officers – had any respect for the system, the regime, the official ideology and its propaganda.  Everybody did what they were told, but nobody believed in what they were doing.  That is the exact situation not only for the French cops who are constantly used to ban, harass and arrest Dieudo and his supporters, but also of an increasing percentage of the general public.

Right now the pressure on the dam is getting stronger and stronger, and the cracks more and more visible.  So far, the elites have had enough fingers to stick into the cracks, but this is clearly a futile attempt to delay the inevitable.  And when the French dam will burst, it will impact not only France, but also a good segment of western Europe.  So while the pro-US Ukrainian nationalists want to subordinate their country to the EU, the EU is threatened with an inevitable and violent explosion.  But, like on the sinking Titanic, the media’s “orchestra” will be playing its music until the last second.

The Saker

What Are Values? by Odinia

OdiniaHdr700 copy

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.16.53 PM

Using one’s Gods-given reason, intellect and common sense, embracing one’s own perspective, and working for the good of one’s own people is sanity, not hatred. In fact, in a society where one is not allowed to reason, and even the feeling of certain natural basic emotions is legislated against, as with “hate crimes”, one is no longer a human being, but a slave. A free human being is allowed to think, speak and to experience emotion… to hate, love or be indifferent… as he or she chooses. Emotions are given us for a reason, and sometimes even hatred is appropriate, and necessary for survival.

I do not apologize for telling the truth in regard to history, or anything else. When facts have been hidden, it is often for no good purpose. Any argument that cannot weather open debate is no argument at all. In the case of the historical facts presented here, the truth is especially important. This is information each one of our people desperately needs to know. Truth, to Odinists, is a virtue, not a “crime”. It is one of many good qualities that we value. Here is a brief video about Odinist virtues:

 View Video: About the Noble Virtues

For example, we stand against the recent onslaught of arrests, and the jailing,  under Zionist-made “hate” laws (laws which actually are meant to suppress free speech), of historians for the “crime” of writing verifiable facts in books. We do not agree with Galileo Galilei being forced to recant the Heliocentric Theory, on pain of death, either. These are much the same sort of thing.

Cowards who want to “fit in”, who look after their own advantage first, last and always, and who collaborate with such things as indefinite detention without trial are not our people. Anyone who thinks nothing of arresting authors for writing books is the enemy of all free humankind. If a European person is so far gone, so brainwashed, that he or she no longer has the inclination, or the courage, to face reality, or deal with it, there is nothing I, or anyone else, can do to help.  For those who still do have the blood, spirit and courage of our ancestors, read on…

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.17.16 PM

The date of this Paper is the September 2nd, 1939. If you look carefully you will see, just above the title of the article, the words “Britain First”..Strangely enough, before I ever saw this newspaper, when I knew only a fraction of the truth, I made a Facebook group called “America First”.

In it, I used to talk about “Israel Firsters”, referring to people who wanted to callously use America, its resources, and the very lives of its people as cannon fodder in order to advance Israel. How little I knew then, about just how serious the problem really is and has been, and how much more I have to learn…

I created this group, America First, after an incident in which several hundred “Americans” attacked me online on Independence Day, and some even gave me death threats. They did this simply because I had said that invading the sovereign Kingdom of Jordan so Israel could expand its borders was not only morally wrong, but not in the interests of the United States of America.

A man I know, or used to know, used this name, “America First” in a video interview and sent me the video afterwards to show me and say thank you. This man is now dead, murdered and demonized by Zionist Jews and their collaborators. He said he feared they would kill him, and he was right.

His name was J.T. Ready and he was an intelligent, motivated man who certainly did not kill himself. He had once worked for the Zionists,  but when he saw what they really were he decided to work against them instead. J.T.Ready changed his dogtags shortly before he was killed to read “Odinist”. Here is the video he sent me.

View Video: J.T. Ready

The last time I spoke to him, J.T. Ready gave me to understand that those of us “domestic terrorists” who spoke out against the unconstitutional, criminal Zionist take-over of our country and media, and who were against such things as placing foreign dual Israeli citizens in our government, for example, had been identified and put on a list, especially those who were considered leaders. If I am ever accused of being a deranged Nazi murder-suicide killer and cannot say anything because I am dead, bear this in mind. 🙂 According to J.T. Ready, I am on the list too.

How very strange that English people wrote those words, “Britain First” in the face of Jewish tyranny, so long ago… but it is not a coincidence. They knew. If only people had seen, and had listened, then I would not have had to write the words “America First” these many years later and we would not be in this predicament. Now not just Germany, Russia, England, Palestine and America have the same problem… but the entire world. If no one listens soon, and if we all do not take strong action in every way we can to reverse what has happened, soon there will be no one left to write.

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.17.33 PMView Video: The Leadership of the Red Army was overwhelmingly Jewish, not “Russian”

I can walk into my living room right now and pick up a “historical” timeline that says Marx was “German”. This is not the case.

Marx, otherwise known as Moses Moredecai Levy was descended from a long line of rabbis.. Trotsky, real name, Lev David Bronstein, was also Jewish..Lenin (also not his real name) was Jewish too. 75% of the Bolsheviks (regular men not leaders) were Jewish.. The international bankers who funded the rise of Communism in Russia? All Jewish. Stalin’s real name? Iosif Dzhugashvili..Dzhugashvili means Jew-son. He was part Jewish and all three of his wives and mistresses were Jewish.

Then there is Lazar Kaganovitch, a Jew who killed as many as 15 MILLION Europeans, but you have never heard of him I imagine. You have heard of Hitler though, I would guess. Here is a video about perspective.

 View Video: Learning about the “Holocaust”

 The KGB leadership…75 percent Jewish, the gulags? You guessed it, and there is a lot more, including mass murderers such as Genrikh Yagoda. Who *wasn’t* Jewish? The Russian royal family, nobility and farmers who were killed and their land taken. Communist Jews killed tens of millions of Europeans out of racist hate..and no one even knows…

 The Hidden Holocaust

 Of the 90,000 German men who surrendered at Stalingrad alone, only 5,000 ever returned to their homeland. Overall, approx. 3 MILLION German soldiers – who had surrendered – died after the war… 1 million at the hands of the Judeo-Bolsheviks and 1.7 MILLION at the hand of Eisenhower.

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.17.57 PM

“Huddled close together for warmth, behind the barbed wire was a most awesome sight; nearly 100,000 haggard, apathetic, dirty, gaunt, blank-staring men clad in dirty gray uniforms, and standing ankle deep in mud … water was a major problem, yet only 200 yards away the River Rhine was running bank-full.“
Col.Charles Beasley

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.18.09 PM

“When they caught me throwing C- Rations over the fence, they threatened me with imprisonment. One Captain told me that he would shoot me if he saw me again tossing food to the Germans … Some of the men were really only boys 13 years of age…Some of the prisoners were old men drafted by Hitler in his last ditch stand … I understand that average weight of the prisoners at Andernach was 90 pounds…I have received threats … Nevertheless, this has liberated me, for I may now be heard when I relate the horrible atrocity I witnessed as a prison guard for one of ‘Ike’s death camps’ along the Rhine.”

Col. James Mason

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.18.39 PM

“Ike” Eisenhower, who killed 1.7 million German servicemen who had surrendered *after* the war. He directed that “prison enclosures are to provide no shelter or other comforts.” Eisenhower wrote in a letter to his wife “God I hate the Germans” and this was the one thing he said that was true. He is referred to in his school yearbook as “the terrible Swedish Jew”. Funny how there is the word “anti-Semitic”, but we do not even have a word for those who hate Europeans.

So extreme is the media bias that many people have not the barest conception of the truth… One good example is Lazar Kaganovitch, an atheist Jew, who was in charge of an operation that killed as many was 15 million European people, a third of them children, and no one has ever even heard of it. Think about why.

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.19.06 PM

This picture shows starved Ukrainian children at Holodomor…They were  starved to death for their land. Everyone has heard of Hitler and of the “Jewish” holocaust, just not the real facts about it. When a historian tells these facts, he or she is arrested… 44 so far that I have looked into so far, and there are many more. The reason is that when any rational person looks at it, he or she sees the truth.

Ilya Ehrenberg..the war propagandist and war provocateur who invented the “6 million” number, the bars of soap, the lampshades…all admitted hoaxes…. His words are quoted below .. it is hard to believe that anyone could be filled with such monstrous hate. Our course all of this is in accordance with the Talmud. In fact, he left his memoirs to Israel.

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.19.16 PM

These words were written in a booklet meant to encourage the Judeo-Bolsheviks to savage European civilians and he was successful…it led to the gang rape, and often torture and murder as well, of 2 million European women and little girls as young as 6.

“Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! …Use force and break the racial pride of these German women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! As you storm onward, kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army.”

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.19.32 PM

The tiny little girl above on the right has had her pants pulled up for the picture. She was raped to death. Just a small part of one account of what happened to helpless, unarmed women and children at the hands of the Judeo-Bolsheviks… (paraphrased from Berlin Downfall 1945 by ANTONY BEEVOR). I know it is hard to believe, but some of the stories are even worse in their own way…

Half-drunk Red Army… soldiers, armed with rifles and machine guns, made unarmed Germans stand in rows. Other Judeo-Bolsheviks forced women and girls to lie on the ground, tore off their clothes and began raping them. ..U.S. soldiers from their truck looked on at all this with eyes wide open. It seemed that they were simply paralyzed by the spectacle. When two young German girls, stripped naked, shouting all the time rushed to the truck and in desperation began to climb on it the American guards pulled them up. The Judeo-Bolsheviks did not like this. Firing wildly into the air and shouting, they rushed to the American truck. The U.S. soldiers quickly readied their guns, and the truck raced away across the road. When it had disappeared, the Judeo-Bolshevik soldiers attacked the German women again.

A young German woman, a little over thirty, mother of a 12-year-old girl, knelt at the feet of a Judeo-Bolshevik corporal and prayed to God that the soldiers take her, and not the girl. But her prayers went unanswered. Tears streamed down her cheeks as she kept praying. The corporal walked away from the woman, his face contorted into a mocking grin. One of the soldiers hit the woman on the face with his boot. “Damned fascist pig!”, he yelled. The young mother fell on her back. The soldier who had hit her, shot her in the head and killed her.

The Judeo-Bolsheviks seized all the German women who were visible. The little daughter of the murdered woman was dragged behind a tank by the killer of her mother. He was joined by other Judeo-Bolsheviks. For half an hour rang out wild screams and moans. Then, completely naked, the girl, unable to stand on his feet, crept back. However, in the overall picture of the atrocities, the suffering of the girl was not unusual. The helpless German men tried to persuade the guards to allow them to help the girl. Rifle at the ready, the Judeo-Bolshevik allowed a German medic to attend to the girl. An hour later she died, and her last sobs burned the hearts of Hartmann and his soldiers. 8 and 9-year-old girls were being repeatedly raped mercilessly by a brutalized Judeo-Bolshevik military. They showed no other feelings other than hatred and lust…. Those who were dragged away from the truck, nobody saw them again.

2 million women and little girls…Little boys who tried to save their female relatives were shot. Many of the victims, who were almost always gang- raped, died. The victims included little girls as young as 6 and women in their 80’s, and also many catholic nuns were assaulted. There was even an assault in a church. The women were led to believe that they would be safe there and then the doors were locked and organ music played by laughing Judeo-Bolsheviks who then assaulted them.

We have ALL heard the name of Anne Frank…Anne Frank who wrote her memoirs in ball point pen (which had not been invented yet) and who actually died of typhus. Why is she considered more important and more worthy of public consideration than these little girls who really were assaulted and butchered?  It is because she is Jewish and these European children are considered to be “goyim” or “human cattle” by the Jewish religion. This is not ancient history either. The IDF rabbi in Israel recently publicly stated that rape in war with non-Jewish victims and Jewish rapists is acceptable because the wars of Israel are, in his words, “not like the wars of other nations”.  According to him, they are “Mitzvah”, or “holy” wars.

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.19.52 PM
Victims of the strategically unnecessary bombing attack upon Dresden..a city of unarmed civilian refugees, mostly women and children. More of Ilya Ehrenberg’s words…

“The Germans are not human beings. From now on, the word ‘German’ is the most horrible curse. From now on, the word ‘German’ strikes us to the quick. We have nothing to discuss. We will not get excited. We will kill. If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day … If you cannot kill a German with a bullet, then kill him with your bayonet. If your part of the front is quiet and there is no fighting, then kill a German in the meantime … If you have already killed a German, then kill another one – there is nothing more amusing to us than a heap of German corpses. Don’t count the days, don’t count the kilometers. Count only one thing: the number of Germans you have killed. Kill the Germans! …  – Kill the Germans! Kill!”

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.20.08 PM

The Israeli government is always demanding apologies, such as when the Swedish government allowed free speech by not stopping a courageous reporter from printing the truth about an international Israeli organ stealing ring. One wonders if the Israeli government is sorry for the destruction of hundreds of Palestinian villages, as in the massacre of helpless unarmed villagers at Deir Yassin or for …the torture, starvation, rape and murder of TENS OF MILLIONS of Europeans, also to steal their land?  My answer would be no. You must decide for yourself. This is a computer generated image of the monument Israel is building to commemorate the Red Army, no doubt using US tax dollars. They are celebrating the atrocities committed by the Red Army and doing it on land obtained by committing other atrocities.

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.20.20 PM

Why are they doing this? Because 75 percent of the regular Judeo-Bolsheviks and every single leader of the Red Army was Jewish. According to the Talmud, none of these things are actually morally wrong. In the Talmud (which takes precedence over the part of the Torah you are probably familiar with) it is permissible to break every one of the ten commandments, and this includes murder, theft and child rape, as long as the victim is not Jewish and the perpetrator is.

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.20.29 PM

Some words from Ovadia Yosef, the head of Shas’s Council of Torah Sages and a senior Sephardic rabbi.. “The sole purpose of non-Jews is to serve Jews…The Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they would have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel…The lives of non-Jews in Israel are safeguarded by divinity, to prevent losses to Jews. Death has no dominion over us…… With gentiles, it will be like any person – they need to die, but [God] will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money. This is his servant… That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew,” Yosef said.“Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi (masters) and eat. That is why gentiles were created.”

Now does everyone understand his or her purpose in the world?

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.20.59 PM

Shortly after entering Poland, the Judeo-Bolsheviks rounded up 22,000  unarmed European civilian and military leaders, and intellectuals and took them to camps where they disappeared and were never heard from again. This was not a regular war after all…the idea was to destroy the European race, nobility first. … In one case the Europeans were taken to Katyn Forest where the Judeo-Bolsheviks shot them in the back of the head and threw them in mass graves. Later the graves were filled in and pines planted over them. We know the details because some of the people who did this, who later went to Israel, were interviewed about it.

The Germans discovered the graves  of approx. 4,000 people in Katyn Forest and reported them to the Red Cross. It was investigated and various governments were given reports about the evidence of who the victims were and who the perpetrators were, this was undeniable. There was not even any contention about it. Despite FULL KNOWLEDGE of what had happened, this  cowardly, racist massacre of European nobility was blamed upon the Germans. The Jewish media- all over the world- portrayed it as a “Nazi crime” and Americans were actually encouraged to go to war to “save” Poland from “the Nazis”.

The Poles were thereby subjected to the Judeo-Bolsheviks, who had killed thousands of their people already, again. It was not until the 1980’s that Gorbachev finally officially admitted that the Judeo-Bolsheviks were responsible for this terrible crime.

The Sinking of the “Wilhelm Gustloff”

Screen Shot 2014-01-28 at 5.21.25 PM

Apathy and willful ignorance…in a way, they are much the same thing. There is a willingness in many to see *only* what we are directed to see, to be led, and not consider the source…Sometimes we even lose sight of titanic ships…ships that carried European women and children… people like us.

Here are civilian refugees fleeing torture, slavery and slaughter, but unless things are drastically changed by us, their story will never be told and will lie forever, silently, on the sea floor.   Many do not want to know the truth, or know anything 🙂 , Often this is because they feel they have better things to do, such as arranging their hair or playing a video game.

And yet, I understand how the man in this video feels. Like him, I hear the voices of the dead calling out for justice. How can it be that some of us have become so self- centered and lost that they cannot hear the voices of our own people? They also cry out in warning,  from a society that was so much more true than ours it is hard to contemplate how far we have fallen. Even dead, they are not as far gone as most of us are at this moment. If we do not hear them, we too will soon be gone. Here is a video about the sinking of the refugee Ship, “The Wilhelm Gustloff”

View Video: The Sinking of the “Wilhelm Gustloff”

_____________________________________________________________________________________
A Word about the Holohoax

But what about “the Holocaust”? Ok, if you are not referring to the real holocausts at Dresden, for example, or the Holodomor Holocaust or the current ongoing Palestinian genocide, all Jewish led, let us examine “THE” Holocaust for a moment…remembering that there were not even 6 million Jews in Europe at the time and that, scientifically, it is impossible to gas anyone and not leave Zyklon B traces. There is no record of a planned genocide by the Germans anywhere, even though we had broken their code…not a single  fly-over revealed any such activity. Also there is the little problem that it would have taken until the 1980’s to cremate that many people, even by modern methods. The Jewish “holocaust” is a monstrous lie.

Some videos about the overwhelming  evidence against “the Holocaust”.

Jews who tell the Truth about the Holohoax

Holocaust, Hate Speech &were the Germans really so stupid?

Undeniable Evidence. Expert Testimony of Fred Leuchter

David Irving, a Historian who was arrested for writing provable Truth

The scientific conclusions of a jewish researcher…

Ernst Zundel. Pacifist historian jailed for 7 years for telling verifiable facts

Holocaust Liar

Zionists Jailing Authors for telling the Truth under Zionist made “hate” laws (which are actually anti- Free Speech Laws) in 14 Countries

——–

For further information on the Odinism and the works of Odinia see the following:

http://odinist.org/

http://odinist.org/cultural-destruction-assault-death-extinction-us-preservation-people-national-character/
 
Foxfire Journal:  https://odinia.org/current-issue/
 
Several Facebook Pages, the main one here:  https://www.facebook.com/Odinia.International
 
The broadcasts (Most important):  https://www.youtube.com/user/odinistpodcast/videos

 

CBC Broadcasting Corporation Spews Forth More Anti-Dieudonne Pro-Zionist Propaganda

cbcstory600

Click HERE to watch the news clip

RadPressEditorNew1 150

True to the deformity we know as Zionism, Canada’s so-called “Canadian Broadcasting Corporation” aka “Zionist Controlled Broadcasting Corporation” is now spewing forth more of the same Zionist lies that their colluding cousins at the BBC are spreading about French comedian and anti-Zionist activist Dieudonne M’bala M’bala and the French anti-Zionist resistance movement that is growing stronger by the day.

gourroutouroutisiComedian Dieudonne and French philosopher Alain Soral

It’s time that Canadians realized that their own “Made in Canada” broadcasting corporation is nothing more than a recycled “Made in Israel” corporation that has branch networks spread throughout the western world, all thinly disguised so as to give the impression that they are truly nationalist corporations with the very best interests of their respective nations at heart. Unfortunately for the Zionist Jews who control all of these nations’ governments and their puppet politicians the veneer of deception has now worn so thin that the ugly face of their NWO agenda pockmarked with their endless lying and deceit are showing through the cracks and disgusting more and more honest citizens who feel a deep sense a loathing whenever they’re subjected to the now overtly transparent propaganda that the Jew controlled media inevitably conjures up to try and stem the tide of truth that is now clearly washing ashore around the world.

ZBCFramed 700

And it’s always the same worn-out epithets and stale, thread-bare, hate-inspiring justifications that we hear repeated ad nuaseam.

Dieudonne (known to his friends and admirers as “Dieudo”) is slandered and accused of being an “anti-Semite” (oh veh! how original).

He’s called a “holocaust denier” (oh, my Lord! shall we hear this over and over 6 million times a day on the Jew Tube?).

thScreen Shot 2014-01-09 at 8.42.36 PM

He’s accused of having invented the infamous gesture known as the (or “la” if you prefer) Quenelle which the Zionist Jews are now attempting to do a 180?spin on and change the meaning from that of an “Up the Establishment” or “Up your ass” gesture to one that they want people to think is an upside down, half-assed, Adolf Hitler (horror of horrors!) salute!

No shit. Next thing it will be shape-shifted into a whole new regime of “HATE GESTURE LAWS” legislation with which to persecute and harass anyone who so much as reaches down their leg to scratch their crotch or their knee! Just think of the legal repercussions for all those Jewish lawyers out there defending anyone who happens to move incorrectly and gets spotted by a Zionist Jew who’s on the look out for upside down Hitler salutes everywhere they look. What next? Will it be a crime to flash a peace sign?

Look at all those anti-Semitic, racist, hate-mongering holocaust deniers in the composite photos below. What a bunch of neo-nazi terrorists! Why they’re everywhere you look.

QuenelleComposite

QComposite2

In fact the whole freakin’ gong show of Zionist psychopaths is turning into just what Dieudo has been making his living from for many years now – a comedy (of unending Zionist errors).

The more the Zionist Jew lobby and their slinking, slimeball sycophants attempt to control the sentiments of the vast majority of decent, common folks who are sick and tired of the Z’s control-freak, paranoid, lying ways the greater their hypocrisy appears and all the more laughable their panic-stricken ploys to vilify and criminalize truth revealers like Dieudonne, Alain Soral and the thousands upon thousands (if not millions) of others who feel the same way about the maniacal Jewish lobbyists and their cold, calculating agenda for control of every emotion, thought and idea that humans naturally come up with when oppressed.

So watch the short C[Z]BC “news” clip that comes to you direct from Britain via the C(Z)BC’s own correspondent and see how they attempt to malign and lie about what is really going on in France today. Could they be preparing for the same type of uprising right here in Canada and playing the same old deck of deceptive cards? Time will soon tell.

—-

The Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs: Canada’s Zionist leash around Stephen Harper’s neck

CIJABomb

Criticize Israel – Go to Jail! Article and Interview with Radical Press publisher Arthur Topham on Veteran’s Today by Joshua Blakeney

 http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/12/22/criticize-israel-go-to-jail/

Blakeney Headerby Joshua Blakeney

 
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” – Voltaire

Recently Prof. James Fetzer invited me to contribute to The Real Deal radio platform on a regular basis. The Real Deal has been one of the most distinguished venues for discussions about all the censored subjects that have been of import in recent years.

HarperLubavichers

From 9/11 to 7/7 to Fukushima to JFK to the deleterious role of Zionist-neocons, Prof. Fetzer’s shows have offered the public invaluable analyses of the kind that are all too often lacking in the mainstream media and the foundation-funded alternative venues such as Democracy Now, which typically censor discussions of topics such as false-flag terrorism and Zionist power.

This week I interviewed a man who is potentially going to have to spend two years in prison in Canada due to the content of political statements he made on his website. Arthur Topham is an anti-Zionist blogger and critic of Canada’s subservience to Israel who was arrested for authoring a satirical article which brought Israel’s existence into question.

Screen Shot 2013-12-22 at 7.12.29 PMLISTEN HERE:  http://nwopodcast.com/fetz/media/real%20deal%20no%20fetzer-arthur%20topham.mp3

According to Israel’s puppet regime in Ottawa questioning Israel’s right to exist is “inciting genocide” which is a crime in Canada. So if you support a one-state solution to the Israel-Palestine debacle rather than an ethnocentric two-state solution you are “willfully promoting genocide” according to John Baird, Israel’s man in the Canadian parliament. You don’t support a multi-cultural democracy if you promote the one-state solution, you want to “drive every Jew into the sea” according to the logic of Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister.

Baird

YouTube – Veterans Today –

Press TV report: “Canadians Search for Explanations for Foreign Minister’s Radicalism”

Screen Shot 2013-12-22 at 7.12.48 PM

To illustrate the double-standards applied with Israel, Topham penned a very clever parody indeed. He took the genocidal tract “Germany Must Perish!” , written in 1941 by Theodore Kaufman, and replaced the word “Germany” with “Israel” to see how the Zionists would like a taste of their own medicine. Opposing anti-German racism, Zionist genocides and Israeli criminality however is a criminal act in Canada. Just as kings and dictators have enshrined laws throughout history to prevent their subjects criticizing them, so Canada’s influential Zionists have successfully established legislation which allows for the criminalization of those who zealously criticize the power and influence of the Jewish “state” and its sayanim in the West.

Germanymustperishmed 300

Opposer of anti-German racism, Ernst Zundel, was kidnapped from the USA and imprisoned in Toronto, Canada for two years in solitary confinement (with the lights on 24-7) for the “crime” of drawing politically incorrect historical conclusions in 2003. Esteemed British historian David Irving found himself on the floor of an Air-Canada plane in handcuffs after the Canadian government deported him to prevent the Canadian public hearing the truth about history. Similarly Mr. Topham has been criminalized for espousing viewpoints which are distasteful to those who rule Canada.

In my interview with Mr. Topham, he explains how he was driving down the highway in his home province of British Columbia with his wife when the police “swooped” down upon their car as if he was a bank-robber, tearing this internet-blogger away from his beloved spouse and dragging him off to jail. This all because he wrote a piece of satire which irritated Zionist anti-free speech groups in Canada. As Dr. Kevin Barrett recently observed in an interview with Topham, writing through the prism of satire usually gives one a great deal of latitude to say things which one would not normally opine. Indeed when I read Mr. Topham’s parody I immediately thought “this is the kind of thing Kevin or perhaps Gilad Atzmon would have written.” But in Canada it seems universally accepted literary standards are to be subordinated to the censorious whims of pro-Israel lobbyists.

Interestingly, there is a schism within the Zionist community currently between those who support anti-free-speech legislation and those who support unfettered free-speech (albeit so they can freely bash Muslims). Since Israel’s 9/11 false-flag was pinned on Muslims Zionist journalists have been authoring genocidal, Hate-Speech against Muslims with the goal of paving the way for the enactment of the Oded Yinon Plan. Whereas Topham was arrested for the hypothetical promotion of a hypothetical genocide against the most invunerable people in the world, Zionist journalists have actually succeeded in creating an environment conducive to pitting different ethnic and confessional groups against each other in the Middle East as per the Oded Yinon Plan. So it is notable that a segment of the Zionist population has begun to oppose Canada’s anti-free speech legislation, presumably realizing that it could be used to prosecute them for anti-Islamic Hate Speech, as has been attempted already. On the other hand there are still those such as the B’nai B’rith who support so called “Hate-Speech” legislation.

Screen Shot 2013-12-22 at 7.12.59 PM

Canada’s Supreme Court, 44% of which consists of Jewish judges, recently upheld a segment of Canada’s anti-free speech, thought-crime legislation. On behalf of the Supreme Court Judge Marshall Rothstein wrote that “not all truthful statements must be free from restriction”. In other words a truthful statement uttered about Canada’s influential Zionist community could land you in prison in Canada.

There is great selectivity displayed when it comes to criminalizing people for their speech in Canada. In almost every instance Canada’s Orwellian Human Rights Commissions (which seemingly exist to deny and negate the Human Rights of free-speech, freedom of expression and freedom of the press) target poor, vulnerable white, Christian men such as Mr. Topham. The recent Whatcott ruling, critically analyzed here, effectively makes the bible criminal. Although Zionist Ezra Levant holds opposite viewpoints to me on 99% of issues, when it comes to opposing thought-crime laws his analyses are valuable. I highly recommend watching this video.
Screen Shot 2013-12-22 at 6.24.51 PM

Mr. Topham is currently in need of support in many forms. He was to be represented by Doug Christie, the inimitable and indefatigable lawyer who defended free-speech thoughout his career until his untimely death earlier this year. Christie’s death means that Arthur Topham and other victims of thought-crime legislation are without the kind of legal support necessary to defend themselves against persecution. In addition to losing his lawyer Mr. Topham has been denied legal aide which underscores the need for lovers of free-speech to contribute in some capacity to his struggle, be it financial or otherwise.

Christie Video

YouTube – Veterans Today –

The late Doug Christie defends free speech against establishment censors

Red spacer copy

 

Watch Human Rights Watch – A Tribute to Prof Richard Falk By Gilad Atzmon

[EDITOR’S NOTE: NGO’s around the world tend to be front organizations from the get go or else orgs arising from honest beginnings that were later infiltrated by Zionists and taken over in order to confuse and misdirect the energies of the masses who are truly interested in a world of peace and harmony where no one group (tribe) or organization has any more power than the people themselves.  Thanks to former Jewish tribal members like Gilad Atzmon, who has successfully shifted his consciousness up and away from the ghetto consciousness of those who are transfixed by the Zionist ideology, we see how liberating one’s mind and spirit from the confines of the Talmudic matrix-trap can be advantageous to all of  humanity in that now he can view the machinations of the Zionist zealots from a perspective that truly makes sense and pass along his viewpoint to all of humanity.]

_________________________

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/watch-human-rights-watch-a-tribute-to-prof-richard-falk.html

Watch Human Rights Watch – A Tribute to Prof Richard Falk

By Gilad Atzmon

Saturday, December 22, 2012

This week we learned that Human Rights Watch (HRW) has expelled from its ranks top U.N. official Professor Richard Falk.

The juicy details have been kindly supplied by Israeli Hasbara outlet UN Watch blog.“We commend Human Rights Watch and its director Kenneth Roth for doing the right thing, and finally removing this enemy of human rights from their important organization,” said Hillel Neuer, a rabid Israeli supporter as well as Executive Director of UN Watch. “A man who supports the Hamas terrorist organization, and who was just condemned by the British Foreign Office for his cover endorsement of a virulently antisemitic book, has no place in an organization dedicated to human rights,”

Hasbara stooge that he is, Neuer, using every Zionist trick in the book, misinforms and misleads his readers. First of all, Hamas is not a ‘terrorist organisation’, it is a democratically elected government and the book to which Neuer refers is obviously mine – ‘The Wandering Who’ – which, was endorsed by Richard Falk and some of the most important humanists and scholars of our time– a book which has been a best-seller for six months in both Britain and the USA, has been translated into 10 languages and is available in seven editions in countries that all strictly legislate against any form of racial incitement as well Holocaust denial. The fact is that the Zionists and their ‘Progressive’ twins will have to accept that The Wandering Who is, after all, strictly kosher.

So, Professor Falk did indeed endorse my book and, like all my other endorsers, did not cave into pressure. This should indeed concern all Zionists and their agents.

“A transformative story told with unflinching integrity that all (especially Jews) who care about real peace, as well as their own identity, should not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely.” Professor Richard Falk on The Wandering Who

But the problem is not the tribally oriented UN Watch and its Zionist Executive Director. After all, they only do what we expect Zionists to do – lie, harass, abuse, and, if necessary, fabricate evidence. No, far more interesting is the behaviour of the allegedly ‘progressive’ ‘Human Rights Watch’ and its director Kenneth Roth.

On the face of it, HRW is an independent, Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) ‘dedicated to defending and protecting human rights’. But it takes no more than a few seconds of research to find out that the primary donor of the HRW is liberal-Zionist George Soros and his Open Society Foundation – the same Soros and ‘Open’ society that supports most Palestinian NGOs including BDS which may perhaps explain why the BDS in Ramallah was so eager to compromise on that most precious Palestinian right i.e. The Right of Return. Nor will it surprise you to learn that the same Soros funded HRW has been dedicated to the ‘exposing’ of Hamas’ failures on human rights issues? Is this not what you would expect from a liberal Zionist spin meister?

In my new satirical work, A Glossary of Zionist Power which I am now completing, I include entries for Soros and his Open Society. In the book, Soros is a ‘Jew who supports a lot of good causes that are also very good for the Jews’ and The Open Society Foundation ‘is dedicated to the transformation of deprived people into Guardian readers’. Surely I will now have to add an entry for the HRW and Roth. Both are nothing short of ‘Zionist fig-leaves’ and, like all Jewish progressive outlets that are dedicated to Jewish tribal and ethno centric campaigning, HRW is there to monitor, control and even stifle any criticism of Israel if it should ever get too close to the bone, i.e. touching on the Jewish character of the Jewish state,

Prof’ Falk had little chance of surviving within such a tribal milieu and the reason is pretty simple. Unlike Zionist Neuer, Liberal Zionist Soros, and ‘Anti-Zionist Zionist’ Roth, Professor Falk actually represents the ultimate success of the Zionist project. Early Zionism promised to transform the Jews into ‘people like all other people’. Zionism vowed to bring to life a Jew who transcends the tribal, a Jew who thinks universally and ethically. Early Zionists also believed that such a transformation could be achieved only in Palestine. Of course, they were wrong but no one can ignore the fact that the greatest and most prolific Jewish universalists are actually Israelis (Professor Yishayahu Leibovitch, Professor Israel Shahak, Nurit & Miko Peled, Gideon Levy, Amira Hass, Uri Avneri, Ilan Pappe, Israel Shamir and many, many more). But Professor Falk and a few others have managed to achieve a similar goal in the Diaspora. Those Jews whom we most admire and whose integrity we most trust such as Professor Norton Mezvinsky, Professor Norman Finkelstein, Professor Falk  – all have something in common – they do not operate within Jews-only political cells. Unlike JVP, IJAN, HRW and Mondweiss, all of whom are dedicated primarily to promoting Jewish interests, they are dedicated to universal values.

So I argue that Professor Falk provides us with a glimpse into the possibility of true Jewish emancipation – the capacity to break out of the mental, intellectual and non-ethical ghetto. Moreover, this latest tale of HRW’s Herem (Kosher expulsion) of one of the greatest humanists of our generation is actually an educational event.

For many years, many of us saw Zionism and Israel as the mother and father of contemporary evil, but now, many of us have come to realise that Jewish progressive politics is every bit as sinister but, unlike Zionism that is only tainted with deception, the Jewish progressive discourse is inherently dishonest – it speaks universal but it thinks tribal.

While our disagreements with Israel and Zionism are clear, the Modus operandi adopted by AZZs and their relentless attempt to dominate the progressive discourse while, at the same time, stifling freedom of expression leaves more and more humanists suspicious of any form of Jewish politics – be it right, left or centre.

I like to think that my Wandering Who was the first attempt to discuss these issues openly. I wrote it because I, too, am a wanderer who decided, instead of dwelling on someone else’s land, to leave my homeland. Perhaps Professor Falk endorsed my work, because, like myself, he too is a wanderer. He self-reflects, examining his identity and his notion of justice from a transcendental point of view. Like myself, he is an artist, a poet, a man who searches, against all the odds, for beauty, peace and truth. On the other hand, George Soros’ Open Society Foundation  contributed $100 million to HRW just to silence ethically and aesthetically driven souls such as Professor Falk and others.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics in general and Jewish progressive spin in particular Amazon.com  or Amazon.co.uk