GERMANY – Jews Furious At German Politician’s Call To End Nazi Guilt from Yahoo

GERMANY – Jews Furious At German Politician’s Call To End Nazi Guilt

Berlin (AFP) – A leading member of German right-wing populist party AfD sparked an outcry Wednesday by criticising the Holocaust memorial in Berlin and calling for the country to stop atoning for its Nazi past.

Bjoern Hoecke’s comments also exposed a damaging split in the anti-immigration party, just months before Germany heads to the polls.

“Up to now, our state of mind is still one of a totally defeated people… We Germans, our people, are the only people in the world who have planted a monument of shame in the heart of the capital,” Hoecke told party faithful including youth members, according to a video of the speech circulated online.

“We need nothing less than a 180-degree shift in the politics of remembrance,” he said in the remarks on Tuesday to chants of “Germany, Germany”.

Instead of introducing younger generations to home-grown “internationally-acclaimed philosophers, musicians and ingenious inventors… German history has been made lousy and ridiculous,” he complained, winning a standing ovation from the crowd.

“There is no moral responsibility to make yourself disappear,” said Hoecke, who was a high school sports and history teacher, adding that Germany should instead “build up a positive relationship with our history”.

The comments were met with an instant uproar, with Social Democrat vice chief Ralf Stegner accusing Hoecke of making a “hate incitement speech” — which is illegal in Germany — that called for history to be rewritten.

Chairwoman of the Greens party Simone Peter said the comments were “unspeakable” and demanded an apology from the AfD to Jews.

“Germany’s Central Council of Jews also lashed out, accusing the politician of trampling on six million Jewish Holocaust victims murdered by the Nazis.”

“The AfD has shown its real face with these anti-Semitic and extremely hostile words,” said the council’s chairman Josef Schuster, adding that he “never thought that 70 years after the Holocaust, a politician in Germany could say such things”.

Council of Europe chief Thorbjorn Jagland also weighed in, saying that “calling our remembrance culture into question is outrageous and dangerous”.

The case also exposed a rift within the party.

AfD co-leader Frauke Petry told Young Freedom weekly that the episode showed that “Hoecke has become a burden on the party with his go-it-alone attitude and constant sniping”.

But deputy chief Alexander Gauland defended the politician, telling national news agency DPA that Hoecke had “in no manner criticised the remembrance of the Holocaust”.

In a post on Facebook on Wednesday, Hoecke also insisted that he had been misinterpreted and that he “described the Holocaust… as a shame for our people”.

The AfD had started out as an anti-euro party, but has since morphed into an anti-immigration outfit railing against Chancellor Angela Merkel’s liberal refugee policy that brought some 890,000 refugees to Germany in 2015 alone.

The party, which disputes the place of Islam in Germany, is polling nationwide at around 12 to 15 percent ahead of general elections.

Hoecke, who is a regional deputy in the eastern state of Thuringia, is viewed as one of the most right-leaning leaders of the populist party.

In December 2015, he sparked outrage when he said that the “reproductive behaviour of Africans” could be a threat for Germany.

Most recently, he was greeted by students chanting “Nazis out” as he tried to make a speech at a university in the eastern city of Magdeburg, and had to leave the hall under police escort.

SOURCE

Ben Gadd: Pea-brained Propagandist for Zion’s “6 Million” Holohoax Lie by Marcus

victoryinend-copy

“In the end Victory stands!”

Ben  Gadd: Pea-brained Propagandist for Zion’s “6 Million” Holohoax Lie  

by Marcus

atrpeditor300

[Editor’s Note: The following commentary by Marcus on on the post “A Reply and Challenge to Ben Gadd  By Monika Schaefer” was so on point that I decided to publish it as a stand alone article.]

“Are the police and courts “haters” when they accuse the Mafia of crimes?”  I suspect in Ben’s pea sized brain, the answer is no. It’s only a crime when Jews are accused of something.

This little rat doesn’t know his backside from his elbow, but goes on talking about the so-called holocaust as if he’s an expert.  Who knows what thoughts that little brain he has contains, but if he swallowed everything the Jews said, then he also believes the Germans made lampshades from Jews skin and soap from Jews fat and believes that the “NAZIS” killed four million Jews at Auschwitz.  Does he even know that the Jews and the allies have already been exposed as liars for all three of these accusations.  The soap and lampshades stories have been discarded by historians as false (that means the allies and Jews lied) and the authorities at Auschwitz reduced their atrocity claim from four million to one million.  That was obviously a lie too.  They had no evidence (still don’t) and they smeared the German people with that lie.

This double talking guttersnipe works to spread the most vile and hateful things about the German people and he calls others the “haters”.  The Jews and idiots like Ben (or perhaps he is one himself) have made doublespeak a centerpiece of their narrative.  Myself, Monika and all Germans must accept the lies peddled by this Jew or in their twisted minds we are the “haters”.

6milben

I wonder if this know nothing, commie looking draft dodger knows that Jews founded and ran (completely dominated the murderous USSR government by being 80 to 85 percent of it) the most murderous regime in history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bSAB5OPkwQ

Does this liar know (or recognize) that this has been completely hidden from the public, with the media keeping it out of their reporting for almost 100 years now and that Jews were the leaders of the Soviet government that burned down Russian churches, raped nuns and murdered priests, oversaw the deliberate starvation of millions of Ukrainians and mass murder of millions of politically suspect Russians. The German government knew it and that is why they called it Jewish Bolshevism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vKOBWz0_4Y

And while world Jewry was making the strongest efforts possible to push the world into WW II by spreading hateful, atrocity propaganda, Germany was at peace before the war broke out in 1939 and Germany’s relatively small Jewish population was safe, with Jews from Poland actually trying to stay or get into Germany.

Yes, those poor, innocent Jews.  Don’t people know that “anti-semitism” has “resulted in the hate-sparked deaths of millions of people over many hundreds of years”?  Ben Gadd sounds like a sayanim and the worst form of propagandizing Jewish liar there is.  The kind that Polish ambassador to the US, Jerzy Potocki was speaking of when he reported back to Warsaw on his observations of the American political scene in 1938:

The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State Department is becoming ever more powerful… The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general catastrophe. This mood is becoming more and more apparent. In their definition of democratic states, the Jews have also created real chaos; they have mixed together the idea of democracy and communism, and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred against Nazism.

This hatred has become a frenzy. It is propagated everywhere and by every means: in theaters, in the cinema, and in the press. The Germans are portrayed as a nation living under the arrogance of Hitler which wants to conquer the whole world and drown all of humanity in an ocean of blood. In conversations with Jewish press representatives, I have repeatedly come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation and understanding between nations. In this way, the conviction is growing steadily but surely in public opinion here that the Germans and their satellites, in the form of fascism, are enemies who must be subdued by the ‘democratic world.’ (February 9) and then reported back to Warsaw again in January 1939:

The feeling now prevailing in the United States is marked by a growing hatred of Fascism and, above all, of Chancellor Hitler and everything connected with Nazism. Propaganda is mostly in the hands of the Jews, who control almost 100 percent radio, film, daily and periodical press. Although this propaganda is extremely coarse and presents Germany as black as possible—above all religious persecution and concentration camps are exploited—this propaganda is nevertheless extremely effective, since the public here is completely ignorant and knows nothing of the situation in Europe. …

The prevalent hatred against everything which is in any way connected with German Nazism is further kindled by the brutal policy against the Jews in Germany and by the émigré problem. In this action, various Jewish intellectuals participated: for instance, Bernard Baruch; the Governor of New York State, Lehman; the newly appointed judge of the Supreme Court, Felix Frankfurter; Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau; and others who are personal friends of President Roosevelt. They want the President to become the champion of human rights, freedom of religion and speech, and the man who in the future will punish trouble-makers. These groups of people, who occupy the highest positions in the American government and want to pose as representatives of ‘true Americanism’ and ‘defenders of democracy,’ are, in the last analysis, connected by unbreakable ties with international Jewry.

For this Jewish international, which above all is concerned with the interests of its race, to portray the President of the United States as the ‘idealist’ champion on human rights was a very clever move. In this manner they have created a dangerous hotbed for hatred and hostility in this hemisphere, and divided the world into two hostile camps. The entire issue is worked out in a masterly manner. Roosevelt has been given the foundation for activating American foreign policy, and simultaneously has been procuring enormous military stocks for the coming war, for which the Jews are striving very consciously.

http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2014/volume_6/number_2/the_jewish_hand_in_the_world_wars_part_2.php

Meanwhile, in Britain “innocent” Jews (read “warmongering”) were bribing Winston Churchill to start a world war against Germany:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jc9ltEIwpo

And the “innocent” Jews continue to operate today, as they did in the 1930’s and I suspect as they always have.  Here is the “number one contributor to the Republican Party”, casino mogul Sheldon Adelson.  In this speech he says Iran should have a nuclear bomb dropped on it if it doesn’t do what the US says:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sCW4IasWXc

Adelson knows and met each Republican candidate who took the money he offered them and promised to carry out his wishes – every one of them.  Trump refused the money at first.  I’m not sure if he eventually accepted it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFAlloGYiSw

The Jewish push for WW II began immediately upon Adolf Hitler taking office as chancellor of Germany.  They immediately began holding atrocity propaganda rallies in New York and international Jewry declared a worldwide boycott of German goods within two months.  Just as in the USSR, the Jews were leaders of the communist party in Germany.  They were violent and had overthrown the Bavarian gov’t shortly after WW I and these were the Jews that were arrested.  There was no terror.  That would come later, as the Jews continued to push for war.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myh-dqvUgYA

In 1936 a Jew named David Frankfurter murdered the Swiss National Socialist politician Wilhelm Gustloff in cold blood.  Two years later the Jew Herschel Grynszpan murdered the young German diplomat Ernst vom Rath in cold blood.  Vom Rath left his wife and young children behind.  This murder kicked off what became known as “Kristallnacht” in which an estimated 91 Jews were killed (not six million or six trillion).  But of course the Jews made the most they could out of it, as they had been lying since Hitler took office.  Compare that to the number of Russians and Ukrainians Jews were murdering at the same time in the USSR.

In 1940 the Jew Theodore Kaufman published his book “Germany Must Perish!” in which he put forth a detailed plan to sterilize the entire German population to kill the Germans off.  His book received rave reviews in the top US media outlets, including Time Magazine.

screen-shot-2017-01-13-at-7-41-32-pm

screen-shot-2017-01-13-at-7-42-18-pm

http://www.ihr.org/books/kaufman/perish.shtml

And this was in the US, a country thousands of miles from Europe that had no business in European affairs.   Charles Lindbergh pointed out the “innocent” Jews as one of three groups (the others being the FDR administration and Great Britain) pushing the US into WW II.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_F48oaOskI

Here is FDR, one of the biggest liars in history, making a speech based upon a phony map and making ridiculous accusations against Germany, claiming it wanted to take over South America and then presumably march on to Washington, D.C, all while the German army was already fighting for its life in the USSR.  FDR justifying the US entry into WW II.  This speech was made a month after Lindbergh’s speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak61DaD32Ww

How the phony map speech came about:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p125_Weber.html

Meanwhile, in Poland and the USSR the Germans noticed that wherever Jews made up a significant part of a population, that is where atrocities against Germans would take place (Bromberg) or partisan attacks on German soldiers or European Nationalists from other countries would be carried out.  The partisan war had begun.  It would end with the Soviet Jew propagandist Ilya Ehrenburg calling for the mass rape of German women, which the Soviet army (and the Americans and British to a much smaller degree) carried out, gang raping two million German women, ranging in age from 8 to 80.  Today that Jewish animal Ehrenburg is honored and buried in Israel (while Germany continues to persecute 90 year old nurses or clerks that served Germany).

Hopefully the bigot Ben Gadd will read this.


In the interests of public justice and truth should anyone wish to contact Ben Rudd his email address is: Ben@bengadd.com

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

amhertribune

OCTOBER 13 ,2016

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

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

1113

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

anti-semitism_adca1

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

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

aht_mahon_5c7b3

jews_mossad_0d0c3

wtc7_d48eb

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

msm_israel_6db0d

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

jvp_3403a

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

israel_cartoon_62a6f

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

haavara_252da

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

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

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

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

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

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

hall_bb_01a73

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

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

1113-1

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

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

the-islamophobia-industry_60fa4

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

5_israelis_dac78

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

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

Notes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


SOURCE ARTICLE

 

URGENT!! You must STAND up for Anthony Hall against B’nai B’rith!!! By Trevor Labonte for TUT

https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2016/10/07/urgent-you-must-stand-up-for-anthony-hall-against-bnai-brith/

URGENT!! You must STAND up for Anthony Hall against B’nai B’rith!!!
By Trevor Labonte
 

holocxt?

Letter to Lethbridge University, written by Trevor LaBonte

Mr. Mahon,

I know that you have recently been a victim of strong-arming by the infamous jewish secret society/hate-cult known as B’nai B’rith.

I know their tactics, they left you no choice but to fire the good Dr. Hall. All of the jewish organizations threatened to withhold funding for Lethbridge unless demands were met. This is standard operating procedure for these gangsters.

I have been featured on Iranian national news and many other shows and I am just telling you the facts that millions or maybe billions of people already know. Anyone who has made any serious inquiry into 9/11 has been met with an enormous array of extremely damning evidence that 9/11 was a zionist operation designed to draw America and other countries into a series of genocidal wars for expansionist Israel.

“Apartheid” does not BEGIN to describe the atrocities the zionist entity commits against the innocent Palestinian people, who only want to live on their own land which has belonged to them for thousands of years.

This paradigm of zionist propaganda will not last much longer. We are in the midst of a great awakening.

I highly encourage you, brother, to reinstate Dr. Hall, and you will be met with cheers and support from all over the world. Let’s chalk up a victory for truth and justice. Don’t make an innocent, heroic man homeless and destitute. This is a crime against humanity that you are being forced to commit at the childish behest of the Jewish lobby, who marches your children into genocidal, illegal wars that nobody but said lobby wants.

Also it may shock you to learn that the holocaust story we have all been taught is fraught with fantastical, physically impossible claims that are 100% without real evidence. The entire source of the story is the Nuremberg trials, which were nothing but a show trial ginned up by the victorious “Allies,” hardly a fair or impartial affair. It was nothing but a farce and a big kangaroo court which only further proved the Allies’ criminality after they firebombed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, dropped nuclear bombs on Japan, and killed millions of defenseless German prisoners AFTER the war was supposedly over. It was hardly a “good war” and is definitely nothing of which to be proud.

Interestingly, in the charter for the trial, in articles 19 and 20, it states that “the trial will not be bound by the rules of technical evidence.” Translated from legalese to English, this means they took the rules and threw them into the trash can. All this talk, for all these years, and all these articles, movies, etc…and here there has never been a single shred of evidence that a single jew was ever “gassed.” There was no “exermination” program, period. The emaciated bodies we see in Allied propaganda photographs are actually proof of Allied atrocities, namely the Allied bombings of supply lines that led directly to mass starvation and typhus outbreak. Yes, the jews that died in Germany’s camps were actually victims of Allied bombings.

 ?no-proof

These are all things that true intellectuals and researchers have known for certain for at least 40 years. It is so very sad that our educational institutions are being forced to peddle such a fraudulent narrative, deceiving, misleading, indoctrinating, and defrauding students of a true education based on facts and evidence. Students going into lifelong debt, just so they can be brainwashed and manipulated. What an epic catastrophe. And here you had ONE good professor, with the courage to investigate the truth, and you let yourself be bullied into throwing him onto the streets for the benefit of the world’s most dangerous gangsters.

This is your chance to be a hero. You will never find a finer example of a human than Dr. Hall. His work is famous around the world for its accurate revelations.

Do the right thing. Don’t martyr Dr. Hall. His blood will be on your hands for the rest of your life, and people around the world already bitterly resent this setback you have just dealt to the global truth community.

Our numbers are massive and we are growing exponentially everyday. We would love you forever if you can help us win this battle instead of capitulating to the tyrannical demands of Jews who believe they are the “Chosen people of God,” and who think they can do no wrong and are above the law. They are an ideological collective of moral relativists who believe that non-Jewish life has no sanctity or importance, and as such, they are hell-bound as well as dead wrong. Don’t do anything to support their racist, anti-gentile agenda.

This world is just a test. Your only job in this place is to do the right thing. Always remember that. Also it is only a matter of time until the truth emerges victorious, so NEVER lose faith, and NEVER be caught on the wrong side of truth.

Sincerely,

Trevor Labonte


trevor-labonte-copy

Jazz artist and peace/truth activist/journalist/blogger/international political commentator Trevor LaBonte

CBC Prince George Reporter-Editor Betsy Trumpener: Lying, Anti-free Speech Hack Agent for B’nai Brith Canada’s League for ‘Human Rights’ By Arthur Topham

screen-shot-2015-02-08-at-6-30-10-am-copy

CBC Prince George Reporter-Editor Betsy Trumpener: 

Lying, Anti-free Speech Hack Agent for B’nai Brith Canada’s League for ‘Human Rights’

By Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press

betsycbcziotroll

Betsy Trumpener CBC “reporter”Prince George, B.C.

As the Constitutional Charter challenge to Canada’s notoriously unjust, Zionist-created “Hate Propaganda” legislation contained in Sections 318 to 320 of the Canadian Criminal Code was due to commence in Quesnel, B.C.’s Supreme Court on Monday, October 3rd, CBC’s Prince George reporter-editor ran a hit piece on the hearing that was posted to the CBC website on September 30, 2016 under the title of B.C. man convicted of promoting hate on web to challenge law in court today.

Due to a court order imposed upon Topham prohibiting him from publishing the names of the traitorous scumbags who’ve been attacking him and his family and website for the past 10 years this article cannot post a direct link to the Trumpener article.

The slanderous excuse for an objective news story was pure Zionist vilification of Arthur Topham, Editor and Publisher of RadicalPress.com that consisted of lies, half-truths and mis- and dis-information.

Trumpener, who has been following the case of R vs Roy Arthur Topham since Topham’s trial back in Oct/Nov. of 2015, has been publishing lies and half-truths about the case in an attempt to portray the publisher of the alternative news site as an “anti-Semitic, Racist, Jew-hater” who’s been using his website to publish articles calling for the “sterilization” and “genocide” of all the Jewish population in order to resolve the “Jewish Problem” once and for all.

In her most recent repulsive screed aimed at defaming Topham’s motives and character, Trumpener, without speaking to Topham and getting his perspective on the case and the Charter challenge, interviewed the Zionist Jew scumbag B’nai Brith agent from Victoria, B.C. who had filed the Sec. 319(2) against Topham back in May of 2011 and prior to that had also filed a Sec. 13 complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission back as far as 2007 alleging that Topham was “promoting hatred toward people of the Jewish religion or ethnicity and/or citizens of Israel”. No shit. Promoting “hatred” toward citizens of the foreign, racist, Jews-only state of Israel.

Trumpener then quotes the lying scumbag Mossad operative known as “Agent Z” and publishes all of his bullshit lies about Topham including the most insidious falsification of all – that Topham was calling “for the sterilization of all Jews” and that, in the scumbag’s demented mind meant “incitement to genocide”.

The same lying Israeli sayan Trumpener had sat through the trial back in 2015 and knew full well that the scumbag from Victoria was lying when he made these statements. She knew that this agent for the foreign racist, supremacist, criminal state of Israel was misquoting statements from a satire that Topham had posted on his website called Israel Must Perish!  This hack “journalist” also knew that Israel Must Perish! was a satirical response to a REAL BOOK published back in 1941 in the USA by a JEWISH writer by the name of Theodore N. Kaufman, titled Germany Must Perish! 

Trumpener was aware that Topham had merely chose some of the more juicey and outrageously hateful sections of the real book of Kaufman’s and then digitally reprinted them VERBATIM. The only alteration of the actual text of the real book was when Topham changed the words “Germany” and “German” and “Nazi” and “Hitler” to “Israel” and “Jew” and “Zionist” and “Netanyahu” in order to transform the original, lurid production of Kaufman’s into a satire or parody of the original work.

It was Kaufman in his book Germany Must Perish! who was calling for the total sterilization of the German population in order to wipe out the German race. It was Kaufman who actually wrote and published this book and when it was placed on the market for sale this heinous publication calling for the absolute genocide of the German population was endorsed on the back cover by some of the leading and most prestigious newspapers and magazines in the United States. Time Magazine and the Washington Post as well as the New York Times and the Philadelphia Record (as illustrated below in the graphic showing the actual front and back covers of the book) all added their voices to the Jewish call for the “total sterilization of the German population in order to wipe out the German race.”

“The lying hack “journalist” Trumpener from CBC Prince George also was cognizant of the fact that in creating the online, digital satire of Kaufman’s book Topham had explained to his readership why he had come up with idea of satirizing Germany Must Perish! and the bottom line rationale for doing so was that the Zionist Jew lobbyists here in Canada had been falsely accusing and vilifying Topham in their Zionist controlled media (including CBC) for close to a decade and calling him a “hater” and a “racist” and an “anti-Semite” and Topham finally had had enough of these hypocrites and bigots calling the kettle black when, in truth, their own tribe of Jewish hate-mongers were the REAL HATERS and ADVOCATES OF GENOCIDING THE TOTAL GERMANIC RACE!”

actualcopyoffrbkcovergermmustper
The lying hack “journalist” Trumpener from CBC Prince George also was cognizant of the fact that in creating the online, digital satire of Kaufman’s book Topham had explained to his readership why he had come up with idea of satirizing Germany Must Perish! and the bottom line rationale for doing so was that the Zionist Jew lobbyists here in Canada had been falsely accusing and vilifying Topham in their Zionist controlled media (including CBC) for close to a decade and calling him a “hater” and a “racist” and an “anti-Semite” and Topham finally had had enough of these hypocrites and bigots calling the kettle black when, in truth, their own tribe of Jewish hate-mongers were the REAL HATERS and ADVOCATES OF GENOCIDING THE TOTAL GERMANIC RACE!

So the satire appeared and when the scumbag Agent Z from Victoria, B.C. saw it he immediately saw his opportunity to twist it around 180 degrees and use it to accuse ME of wanting to genocide the “whole Jewish population”. He filed his complaint with the faggot Det. Cst. Terry Wilson of the BC Hate Crime Team and Wilson swallowed Agent Z’s story hook, line and sinker (along with who knows what else) and proceeded to commence an investigation that eventually led to the arrest and incarceration of Topham on May 12th, 2012 and the Sec. 319(2) charge of “promoting hatred toward people of the Jewish religion or ethnicity”.

It never seemed to have registered on the scumbag Agent Z or Det. Cst. Terry Wilson OR the BC Attorney General’s office who laid the charge that if Topham was calling for the “genocide of the total Jewish population” then he should have been charged under Sec. 318 of the Criminal Code NOT Sec. 319(2) because Sec. 318 deals with the promotion of genocide.

That folks is what the lying, hasbara Israeli reporter from CBC should have published in her story about Topham’s Charter challenge to Sec. 319(2) for that is the TRUTH about what happened and why Topham was framed and exploited and incarcerated and dragged through over four years of endless litigation. But then of course that’s NOT what B’nai Brith Canada wants done and CBC, given that it, as well as all of Canada’s major mainstream media, are controlled by the Zionist Jew lobby, instead publishes the LIES that the Zionist Jews want published.

So the question remains – who are the real haters in this psycho-drama now unfolding throughout Western civilization and when are they going to be held accountable for their traitorous acts against Canadian citizens?

——

The bravery of old women By John Kaminski

braveryofolderwomenhdr

The bravery of old women

Detoxifying the disinfo that keeps us enslaved

INSPIRING THE YOUNG WITH COURAGEOUS GRACE AND AUTHENTIC INTEGRITY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

aimingtonyfinal

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

Originally published here: 

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

prof-hallphoto

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

fakebengimage

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The B’nai Brith in Action

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

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

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

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

amandahohmann

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

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

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

Ms. Hohmann asserted that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

germanymustperishmed

germanymustperishbackmed

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

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

Thought Police Wreaking Havoc on Campus

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ritual Defamation in the Social Media Circus

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ben Garrison

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—-

Escape From The Holocaust Lie by Arthur Topham

EscapeHoloHdr

Escape From The Holocaust Lie

By
Arthur Topham

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

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

DouglasHChristiecopy_zps43b1b5c0

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

tazebook_dees-1-copy

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

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

ZundelTrialFreeSpeechDC800 copy

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

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

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

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

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

As Doug Christie put it in his summation:

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

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

RaulHilbergPic

And the Beat(ing) Goes On

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

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

MonikaSchaeferSorryMomHdr copy

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

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

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

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

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

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

CanadaBBLOBBY3 copy 5

What to do?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RepealHateLaws-1000 copy 2

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

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

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

______

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

61S8bffFqrL

The Holocaust Hoax Exposed

Perfect Paperback – March 15, 2012

by Victor Thorn (Author)

4 out of 5 stars

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

Click HERE to view book on Amazon.com

Chosen By God: Jewish Religions and The Prospect of Dissent by Gilad Atzmon

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2015/12/31/jewish-religions-and-the-prospect-of-dissent

Screen Shot 2016-01-01 at 12.37.20 PM

Jewish Religions and the Prospect of Dissent
By Gilad Atzmon

December 31, 2015

“The Jewish religion is a religion of Mitzvoth (commandments) and without this religious idiom, the Jewish religion doesn’t exist at all.”
~ Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz

While Islam and Christianity can be easily understood as belief systems, Judaism actually defies the notion of belief all together. Judaism is an obedience regulative system. The Judaic universe is ruled by ‘mitzvoth’ (commandment), a set of 613 precepts and directives ordered by God. In opposition to Christianity and Islam that build from spiritual and heavenly precepts in worship to a transcendental God, the Judaic subject subscribes to strict earthly and material observance. While the Islamo-Christian is wrapped in God’s loving and the spirituality of the sublime and divinity, the follower of Judaism is judged by his or her ability to adhere to hundreds of rigorous earthly orders.

A brief look at the Judaic Sabbath common prayer reveals the nature of Judaism as an obedience regulatory system. As we can see below, in Judaism, even God-loving is not an involuntary act:

“You shall love Adonai your God with all your heart,?with all your soul, and with all your might.?Take to heart these instructions with which I charge you this day.
…Thus you shall remember to observe all My commandments?and to be holy to your God.?I am Adonai, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt to be your God:?I am Adonai your God.”
(Common Prayers for Shabbat Evening From Deuteronomy and Numbers)

For the Jew, belief and God-loving are not subject to either rational discretion or spiritual impulse. God loving, as we read above, is a strict “charge”, an order. But if Judaism is not a belief system, what kind of system is it?  Does the Judaic subject believe in anything at all?

The answer is yes: the Jew believes in ‘The Jews’ and the Jews believe in ‘The Jew.’ This mode of mutual affirmation establishes a solid and forceful tribal continuum that serves the collective as well as the singular subject.  Accordingly, the subject adheres to the collective and vice versa. In pragmatic terms, the Jew sticks to the ‘chosen people’ and, together the ‘chosenites’ uphold a collective sense of choseness.

In Judaism, ‘choseness’ is the belief that the Jewish people were singularly chosen to enter into a covenant with God.  For religious Jews, being chosen is realised as a duty. According to Judaic belief, the Jews have been placed on earth to fulfill a certain purpose. This purpose is bestowed upon the Jews and they pass it from father to son.[1]

In reality, the first Jews invented a God who chose them over all other people. For some reason this God is occasionally cruel, often non-ethical and as if this were not enough, not exactly a nice father. The Jewish God doesn’t even allow his people to call him by name. One may wonder what led the first Jews to invent such a horrid father figure. One may further question what led the Jews to sustain their ‘relationship’ with such an obnoxious father. The answer is surprisingly simple. They don’t.

The Jews don’t believe in God, they are observant of God. They believe in themselves- the Jews believe in ‘The Jew’ and vice versa. Within this peculiar troubled family affair, the Jew is free to dump God, as an author can freely re-write or at least re-shape his or her own narrative.  But the Jew can never dump the Jews as much as the Jews can’t allow ‘The Jew’ to go free. And what about God, can he be emancipated, can he choose another people? Certainly not. Unlike the Jew who is free to dump God while clinging to a Jewish identity, the Jewish God is merely a Jewish protagonist, he can’t go anywhere, he is stuck with ‘his’ chosen people forever.

Choseness, so it seems, is hardly a heavenly gift, it is in fact a curse. It confines the Jew in a realm of self-imposed commandment and materiality. Instead of beauty, holiness and the pursuit of the divine and the sublime, the rabbinical Jew is left with an earthly obedience scheme that is sustained by a rigid tribal setting. ‘The Jew’ and ‘The Jews’ are bound in a set of mutual affirmations in which God serves an instrumental role.

Some may rightly argue that this spectacular bond between the Jews and ‘The Jew’ is essential for an understanding of the dichotomy between Judaic tribalism and the universal appeal of Islamo-Christian beliefs.

The Judaic crude intolerance towards dissent serves as an example of the above. Throughout their history, Jews have proven themselves hostile toward their nonconformists; now we are ready to grasp why.  For the Islamo-Christian, secularization, for instance, entails a rejection of a transcendental affair. But for the rabbinical Judaic subject, failure to conform constitutes a rejection of the Jews. It interferes crudely with the fragile relationship between ‘The Jew’ and the Jews. It shatters the self-affirmation mechanism. While in the case of Christianity and Islam dumping God suggests turning one’s back on a remote supernatural entity, in the case of Judaism, such an act is interpreted as a disbelief in the tribe.

This interpretation may help illuminate Jesus’ plight. It may explain the reasoning behind the brutal Rabbinical Herem (excommunication) against Spinoza and Uriel Da Costa. And it also explains why the secular and the so-called ‘progressive’ Jew is equally obnoxious towards dissent or any form of criticism from within. If Judaism is not a belief system but rather a system of obedience regulation, then Jewish identity politics is merely an extension of the above regulatory philosophy.

Jews often drop their God, simply to invent a different God who ‘facilitates’   subscription to a new regulatory system. The new system, like the old outlines a new set of strict commandments, a manner of speech and rigorous boundaries of ‘kosher’ conduct.

In the beginning of the 20th century, for instance, Bolshevism appealed to many Eastern European Jews. It provided a sense of self-righteousness in addition to regulating a strict form of obedience. As we know, it didn’t take long for Bolshevism to mature into a genocidal doctrine that made Old Testament barbarism look like a juvenile fairytale. The Holocaust, that seems to be the most popular Jewish religion at present, may be the ultimate and final stage in Jewish historical development. According to the Holocaust religion, ‘God died in Auschwitz.’  Within the context of the Holocaust religion, ‘The Jew’ is the new Jewish God. The Holocaust religion has finally united ‘The Jew’ and the Jews into a self-sufficient comprehensive and independent ‘God-less’ religious narrative. Both were about to be eradicated. But, not only were they both saved: they have prevailed and each did so independently. In the Holocaust religion, Jews are both victims and oppressors – they have transformed slavery into empowerment and they did it all alone, in spite of being dumped by their treacherous God.   The Holocaust religion, like Judaism, prescribes a manner of speech and a strict set of commandments. Most crucially, like more traditional Judaism, it is totally and disgracefully intolerant toward dissent.

Due to the lack of a divine transcendental entity, Jewish religions have always regarded criticism as rejection of the tribe. Jewish religions, whether Judaism, Bolshevism or Holocaust, are equally intolerant towards criticism and dissent. Jewish religions treat opposition as a vile attempt at ‘delegitimization’ on the verge of genocidal inclination.

Jewish religions can be defined as different templates that facilitate a sense of choseness. They affirm a bond between an imaginary marginal ‘collective’ and a phantasmal ‘archetype’: the Bolshevists and ‘The Bolshevik’, the Survivours and ‘The Survivour’, the Jews and ‘The Jew,’ and so on.  The bond between the collective and the idea of an archetypical singularity is always maintained by a set of rigid commandments, a correct manner of speech, some strict regulatory guidelines for behavior and vile opposition to dissent.

Tragically enough, intolerance of dissent has become a universal Western political symptom. Incidentally, Christianity, Islam, religion and divinity in general are also under attack within the context of contemporary Western discourse. Is this a symptom of the Jerusalemification of our Western universe? Is the emergence of the tyranny of political correctness a coincidence? And if we are becoming Jews, is there any room for the hope that our universe may, at some stage, embrace a universal ethos once again? Can we once again believe in something?   Or do we have to wait for a new Jesus figure to resurrect our trust in the human spirit and humanity in general?  Or have we been re-designed to self-destruct as soon as we come close to such a lucid awareness?

—-

[1] As God himself suggests in the Book of Genesis: “And I (God) will establish My covenant between Me and you (the Jews) and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you.”  (Book of Genesis, Chapter 17).

Holocaustianity on the march By Brandon Martinez (Non-Aligned Media NAM)

HolocaustHdr4MartinezArtFin

Holocaustianity on the march

By Brandon Martinez

Non-Aligned Media (August 6, 2015)

Brandon MartinezImage

When perusing YouTube last night, I came across a curious episode of the BBC debate show “The Big Questions.” The topic of this one was “Is it time to lay the Holocaust to rest?” It featured a coterie of Zionist Jews on one end and a dilapidated kosher-opposition on the other who shuddered in fear of the aggressive, hubristic Judeo-Nazis arguing that the “Holocaust” should be memorialized and commemorated until the end of time. To those in-the-know on the Jewish question, this show will inevitably produce one of two effects: it will either make you vomit out of disgust at the insane narcissism of the Jewish participants, or it will cause you to seethe with anger that such obviously demented people are given such a prominent voice in the media to promote their toxic supremacist viewpoints.

The Jewish panelists on the show endeavored to convince everyone that the “Holocaust” is a “unique” and “exceptional” event in history that has no equivalents. This claim is erroneous because all major historical events have some unique elements to them, so the same could be said about the Rwandan genocide, the Armenian genocide, Soviet-Communist atrocities, the Israeli-sponsored slow motion genocide of the Palestinians and other outrages. Despite their protestations to the contrary, those Jews who advance the alleged uniqueness and exceptionality of the Holocaust do so not because it was such in practice, but because they view its victims as unique and exceptional; they are, in essence, Jewish supremacists who believe Jewish casualties carry more weight than others, that Jewish blood has more worth than the blood of non-Jews. They pathetically tried to eschew such allegations on the BBC show, but their ethno-supremacist inferences are plain and obvious to those who can decipher Talmudic doublespeak. The former head of the Zionist-oriented Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, perfectly encapsulated this Judeo-supremacist notion when he said:

“The Holocaust is something different. It is a singular event. It is not simply one example of genocide but a near successful attempt on the life of God’s chosen children and, thus, on God Himself. It is an event that is the antithesis of Creation as recorded in the Bible; and like its direct opposite, which is relived weekly with the Sabbath and yearly with the Torah, it must be remembered from generation to generation.”

AbeFoxmanImage

From the Jewish vantage point, it’s obvious why they wish to elevate the Holocaust narrative to sacrosanct, cult-like status, and to keep it there for all eternity. It supremely serves the Jewish-Zionist interest to have the Gentile masses genuflecting at the altar of Jewish victimology. As Norman Finkelstein argues in his book The Holocaust Industry, the Holocaust story serves to bolster Jewish economic and political privilege and works simultaneously to subdue forces opposed to that privilege. In other words, it is a weaponized mechanism of Jewish power and advancement, wielded like a sledgehammer against opponents of Zionism and Jewish ethnic supremacism in our world; it works to shame and stigmatize all criticism of Jews, Israel and their malevolent actions. A former Israeli minister once said that invoking the Holocaust as well as the “anti-Semite” canard are deceptive “tricks” designed to stifle debate about Jewish-Zionist atrocities in Palestine and their disproportionate power in the West. Who in their right mind can disagree?

1016856_336755729792690_6897076_n copy

Was that not the desired outcome of the Holocaust campaign all along, to weaken Gentile resolve in the face of Zionist domination as well as guilt-trip the world into fast-tracking the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine? It appears so, and is evidenced by many statements from Jewish leaders over the years, going back as far as the year 1900. That year seems to have been a coming out party for the Zionist clique hell-bent on conquering the world led by such tribalist fanatics as Rabbi Stephen S. Wise and Chaim Wiezmann, two ultra-dedicated Jewish supremacist activists who plotted for decades to bring about the creation of Israel. In 1919 Weizmann said that securing the Zionist dream would be achieved “through persistent propaganda, through unceasing demonstration of the life force of our people.” He then issued an ultimatum to the world:

“We will establish ourselves in Palestine whether you like it or not. You can hasten our arrival or you can equally retard it. It is however better for you to help us so as to avoid our constructive powers being turned into a destructive power which will overthrow the world.”

WeizmannImage

Two decades earlier at a Zionist meeting in New York, Rabbi Wise spoke of “6,000,000 living, bleeding, suffering arguments in favor of Zionism,” a prescient remark that laid the foundation of what many have called the “Six Million Myth.” The propagation of that myth did not begin at the close of the Second World War, but evidently in 1900 and even before that, by Zionists attempting to garner sympathy for their cause of establishing a Jewish state in a land mostly populated by Arabs.

Dating from 1900 to 1945, there are hundreds of examples of individual Jews, Jewish-owned newspapers and pro-Zionist Christians invoking the story of “six million Jews” in grave danger of persecution or annihilation. I mentioned 13 glaring examples of this in my book Grand Deceptions, some of which are: the 1906 New York Times article reporting on the claims of Jewish activist Dr. Paul Nathan who alleged that six million Russian Jews were facing “murderous extermination” by the Czar; the 1911 presage by Max Nordau, a prominent Zionist leader, who told his co-religionists at the Zionist Congress in Switzerland that six million Jews would soon fall victim to a campaign of genocide by European regimes; the countless references to six million victimized Jews during World War I, particularly the 1919 American Hebrew article which told of “six million Jewish men and women” languishing in a “holocaust” of hunger and despair; the 1936 pronouncement of Chaim Weizmann before a British commission on Palestine, where he said that “six million Jews” were destined to death in Europe, and that their only refuge was “in the land of Israel”; another 1936 Zionist plea published in the New York Times which envisaged a harrowing “Holocaust” of Europe’s Jews, the only remedy for which was said to be “the restoration of the land of Israel to the children of Israel”; a 1940 warning from World Jewish Congress chairman Nahum Goldmann who alleged that a Nazi victory in Europe would spell “doom and destruction” for “6,000,000 Jews”; the December 1944 proclamation of Soviet propagandist Ilya Ehrenburg who floated the claim that “six million Jews” had fallen victim to Germany five months before the war would come to an end in May of 1945, long before any accurate statistical data on war deaths could have been ascertained. Even after the war, a precise calculation of Jewish deaths would be impossible considering the contentious issue of what constitutes a Jew to begin with. Yet by way of some miracle the Jewish leadership knew it was exactly “six million” before the last bombs and bullets of the war had reached their targets.

six-millions-1919-1 copy

The six million death figure is not rooted in any semblance of truth or fact, but rather in religious superstition stemming from the Kabbalah and gematria. The number six and variations of it is significant in that milieu. Mysticism and ‘magic’ is part and parcel of the Jewish religion, and manifests itself in the propaganda of the Holocaust narrative. The six million story was crafted by Jews transfixed with the Kabbalistic school of thought, which is why facts, evidence, logic and reason have no bearing on it – no matter what it remains a stagnant, unalterable story etched in stone, and anyone who attempts to revise it, even slightly, is villainized as a ‘Nazi-sympathizer.’

Regardless of the massive official reductions in the death totals at Auschwitz, Majdanek, Mauthausen and other wartime camps (more than four million “victims” have been excised from the official death total in recent decades), the six million figure is never altered, and is repeated again and again in schools and the media. Despite admissions from and exposé’s on prominent “Holocaust survivors” proving that their recollection of events was embellished, exaggerated and in some cases outright fabricated, skeptics are smeared as ‘hatemongers.’ Notwithstanding the scientific studies of chemists like Germar Rudolf, which have severally undermined claims about homicidal gas chambers, questioning the central tenets of the story (the six million number, the gas chambers, the “final solution” plan, etc.) is considered an unforgivable heresy and is stamped out with medieval fundamentalism. Does this not confirm that the doubters are on to something?

Jewish leaders seem to have an uncanny knack for foresight, unveiling a historical pattern of foreknowledge indicative of a conscious plan of intrigue coordinated over decades if not centuries. The aforementioned Rabbi Stephen Wise, who is described by the website of the US Holocaust Memorial Museum as “instrumental in obtaining President Woodrow Wilson’s support for the Balfour Declaration of 1917,” predicted the election of Woodrow Wilson as US President and later became his advisor; the Zionist leader Max Nordau predicted World War I in 1903; as mentioned above, Zionists routinely anticipated the demise of six million Jews, and then declared six million Jewish deaths months before World War II had even ended; in 1962, David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, prophesied the establishment of a Jewish-led world government centered in Jerusalem where the United Nations “will build a Shrine of the Prophets to serve the federated union of all continents”; in 1979 the founder of Israel’s spy agencies, Isser Harel, envisioned a terrorist attack upon New York City’s “tallest building.” Is all of this uncanny prescience merely coincidental, or are these Zionist Jews political magicians who “make” happen what they want to see in the world?

Screen Shot 2013-05-18 at 10.53.23 AM copy

The agenda behind the Holocaust promotion industry couldn’t be more transparent. Memorializing the Holocaust is “central to the new world order,” Ian J. Kagedan, a spokesman of the Jewish-Masonic B’nai B’rith organization, wrote in 1991, adding that “achieving our quest of a ‘new world order’ depends on our learning the Holocaust’s lessons.” Using coded-language, Kagedan spoke of Holocaust mythology as a sort of “new religion” to be instituted worldwide that will function as a platform to launch a project for global Jewish hegemony, although the Zionists will disguise the scheme as a humanitarian endeavor aimed at ridding the world of war and calamity. In 1940, the British politician Arthur Greenwood announced that Jews would be granted a leading role in the construction of a “New World Order” after the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II, a world in which alleged Jewish grievances would be alleviated by way of unrestricted access to power positions. We have seen many parts of that vision enacted according to plan.

If nothing else, the unsettling BBC program mentioned above should serve to motivate people to challenge the supremacist discourse of Holocaustianity. While doing so may jeopardize career prospects and social status, fighting this artificial, largely fabricated narrative is one of the principal liberation struggles of our time; one that will work to empower the dispossessed and perennially victimized Palestinians who continue to be slaughtered by Israel in droves (with the full support of Zionized Western powers), and also the peoples of the West who, for the last few centuries, have been used as tools for Zionist imperialism and whose own cultures have been degraded by these same forces.

Copyright 2015 Brandon Martinez

Video | URL: http://wp.me/p4UshE-Mx
http://nonalignedmedia.com/2015/08/holocaustianity-on-the-march/

Drawing inspiration from the Non-Aligned Movement, especially the organization’s rejection of illegitimate global power structures, Non-Aligned Media (NAM) exists to expose, in particular, the negative outgrowths of the global Zionist-American Empire. Founded by journalists Brandon Martinez and Joshua Blakeney, the aim of NAM is to cut through the spin and deception of mainstream media and uncover truth in history. Not shackled by the political correctness which permeates the mainstream, NAM seeks to tackle the “taboo” subjects that have been relegated to the fringes by the powers that be, emphasizing the real forces behind war and globalism. Reoccurring themes of NAM include: False-Flag Terrorism, The Israel Lobby, The Mainstream Media, Hollywood and Zionism, Historical Revisionism, Supposed “Just Wars” Historically and Contemporarily, Ethnic Exceptionalism: Who Can be Ethnocentric and Who Cannot?, Race & Cultural Relativism, The Globalization of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, Thought-Crime Legislation and the State Regulation of History, Theology and Supremacism, The Geopolitical Battles Over the Middle East, Joshua Blakeney, Nationalism versus Internationalism.

Brandon Martinez can be contacted by email at: martinezperspective@hotmail.com

Joshua Blakeney can be contacted by email at: josh.vivelarevolucion@gmail.com

Breaking News! Zio-German Thought Police Arrest German Historian Ursula Haverbeck!

RadicalNewsHdr copy 4

 http://conservative-headlines.com/2015/06/german-police-storm-home-of-elderly-woman-who-debated-holocaust/

German Historian Ursula Haverbeck has been arrested and charged with “holocaust denial” and her home ransacked along with the homes of some of her supporters. Rise up you German slaves and put an end to this despicable behaviour on the part of your Jewish overlords! 

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

 

Canada: Hypocrite Nation Ruled by Zionist Deception & anti-Free Speech Laws by Arthur Topham

CanFlag1

Canada: Hypocrite Nation Ruled by Zionist Deception & anti-Free Speech Laws

Deconstructing the Zionist media’s hypocrisy surrounding Charlie Hebdo and the notion of “Freedom of Speech”

By

Arthur Topham

January 19th, 2015

 

“The National Post, perhaps Canada’s foremost advocate and practitioner of censorship, is the least qualified to condemn the alleged revenge massacre of 11 Charlie Hebdo workers, yet devoted several consecutive front pages and endless verbiage to the incident – far greater coverage than that allotted to the brutal massacre of 3000 innocent Palestinians several months earlier in Gaza, although the massacre was the more reprehensible for having been committed by a racist, occupier government already condemned by the United Nations for its barbarism.”

~ Ian V. Macdonald, letter to the National Post, Jan. 10, 2015

 

The latest Zionist false flag event in Paris, France on January 7th, 2015 that wiped out the staff of the pro-zionist, anti-Muslim, anti-Christian Charlie Hebdo hate propaganda rag, immediately unleashed a massively orchestrated outcry of cacophonous proportions from the Beast’s Big Brother Zionist msm media calling for greater protection of people’s right to “Freedom of Speech”.

Apart from the aftermath of 9/11, never has this writer witnessed such a unified show of chimerical bigotry and deception, all of it wrapped in the gilded glitter of falsely misplaced emotional rhetoric, blatant lies and contrived television imagery specifically designed and pre-packaged to elicit a world-wide response from an unconscious audience of somnambulant innocents still too blurry-eyed and bewitched to recognize the reality of the Rothschild New World Order and its modus operandi.

Reacting with predictable clockwork precision to their own fabricated murderous crime; one bearing all the standard hallmarks of yet another Israeli Mossad covert operation designed to appear as a deliberate “terrorist act” by a fanatical group of “radical” Muslims, the Canada-wide Zionist-controlled media immediately cranked up its Islamophobic sirens to a deafening roar with broadcasts blaring forth from talking heads accompanied by what W. H. Auden once aptly styled, “the hum of the printing presses, turning forests into lies” with their broadsheets whirling like buzz saws 24/7, flashing out nonstop, monotonous anti-Islam hate messages to Canadians across the country.

This relentless verbal/visual assault by the Talmudic inspired Israeli/Rothschild media upon the abused psyche of Western civilization – ongoing since their hugely successful 9/11 coup of September 11th, 2001 – has now reached the stage where every facet of their global crime syndicate is being utilized to increase hatred and fear of Islam to a climactic point of no return, thus providing their needed justification for whatever pre-emptive mode of violent attack the Zionist Jew killing machine might wish to adopt in the near future.

No better example exists of this hypocritical, bigoted vilification of Islam by the Zionist-controlled media than that found in their premier flag ship hate generator the National Post, Tel Aviv’s direct propaganda line for funnelling into the unwary, dumbed down minds of Canadians, Israel’s racist, supremacist, apartheid mindset; one that constitutes the foundational basis of its twisted, psychopathic political ideology known as Zionism.

NatZJPost copy 7

Completely disregarding Canada’s horrific record of outright censorship, harassment, fines, jailings and ongoing suppression of its own citizens’ fundamental right to freedom of speech, the Zionist media now has the unmitigated chutzpah to sermonize to Canadians about how important it is to protect “FREE SPEECH” for the likes of Charlie Hebdo and co. all the while overlooking the stinking mess of free speech violations in Canada’s own backyard.

Canada’s Disgraceful “Free Speech” Record

The National Post, of all Canada’s zio-rags, is a veteran of the infamous and controversial Section 13 “hate speech” legislation wars that suddenly gained prominence across the nation around 2007 when the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) filing a Section 13 “hate speech” complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) against Rogers Media Inc. (Macleans Magazine), based upon the reproduction of perceived anti-Islam writings by one of their pro-Zionist Jewish writers Mark Steyn.

Coinciding with Steyn’s case was also that of Ezra Levant, then owner of the Western Standard, an Alberta based tabloid that callously published the infamous Jyllands-Posten cartoons of the  Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) back in February of 2006. As a result of Levant’s insolent disregard for Islam’s holy Prophet both the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and the Edmonton Council of Muslim Communities filed complaints against Levant and his magazine with the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission that resulted in a hearing in January of 2008.

 MarcLemireFreedomsite

Marc Lemire, one of Canada’s most distinguished Section 13 victims and staunch resister to this nasty piece of Zionist/Bolshevik-motivated legislation, gives us a compete, well documented history of the rise and fall of Section 13 which can be found on his website, FreedomSite Blog As well, for those interested in delving into the specifics surrounding this specious piece of draconian “hate speech” legislation that initially slithered its way into Canadian jurisprudence via the untiring efforts of Canada’s Jewish lobby organizations (predominantly the former Canadian Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith Canada) beginning as far back as the 1950’s, I suggest reading the following article, Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” Laws.

In Part 3 of Lemire’s history, under sub-heading “Section 13: The Shit hits the fan”, he writes: “Keep in mind that the primary intent of Section 13 was to quietly keep it behind closed doors and censor individuals in a manner which “would not be attended by great publicity”.  While this was true with most Section 13 cases, it certainly was not true with Mark Steyn and Macleans Magazine. The proverbial ‘hate speech earthquake’ hit the media, once it was revealed that one of Canada’s most respected magazines and the “one-man global content provider” Mark Steyn were under investigation for hate speech.  Editorials against censorship went viral from coast to coast in Canada and spread across the globe via the Internet.”

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

In the case of Canada and its Section 13 “hate crime” laws, which invariably include the same accusation of “anti-Semitism”, the punishment wasn’t quite as severe or immediate but metaphorically speaking, in term of survival, the victims stood no greater chance of gaining their freedom once accused.  Many, if not most of the victims, were unable to afford to hire counsel and even if they were able to the fact that Truth was not considered a viable defence against whatever they had written or spoken, it was virtually impossible to argue against the charge. As such the defendants were at the mercy of the tribunals and the commission’s commissars were able to maintain a 100% conviction rate right up until 2007 when, Allah be praised!, the Canadian Islamic Congress and other Muslim organizations finally decided to file similar Section 13 complaints against the two self-chosen writers mentioned above who were, by their Judaic birthmarks, both members of the same conniving covenant that initially bore responsibility for creating these very censorship laws in the first place. Not only that, they were the only two Jews in Canada ever to be charged with “hate speech” under Section 13 and, surprise! surprise! the only two individuals ever to escape the snares and traps that CHRC and the CHRT had used on hundreds of non-Jewish Canadians for decades prior to then.

SteynLevantJNOMouthpieces800

It has always been this writer’s contention, based upon my last eight years of personal experience in dealing with these Orwellian censors, that had the Canadian Islamic Congress not filed a complaint against Mark Steyn and Macleans Magazine and had Ezra Levant also not been charged by a Muslim complainant over his publication of the infamous Prophet Muhammad (SAWW) cartoons, this Zionist-inspired legislation known as Section 13 that clung like a barnacle to the dark underside of Canada’s legal system for the past thirty years without the Zionist media challenging it, would, in all likelihood, have continued on unabated and still not have been repealed. It was only the final realization by the Jewish lobby that Section 13 was, in fact, a double-edged sword capable of being used against their own kind as well that spurred the Zionist media on to make a major issue out of an Orwellian, Zionist-driven law that had for decades been used against non-Jews with hardly a murmur of protest. Now that the perpetrators themselves were being held to account for the same crimes the whole dynamic changed and the war to rid the nation of Section 13 began in earnest.

It was around the same period (2007) when Steyn and Levant received their just deserts that I and my website RadicalPress.com were also caught up in the legally sticky Section 13 “hate speech” web and I suddenly found myself forcefully initiated into that elite, Zionist-created group of alleged “hate-mongers”,”anti-Semites”, “racists” and “neo-Nazis” who had come before me throughout the late 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. In my own case it was the secret, Jews-only Masonic society, B’nai Brith Canada who had filed a Section 13 complaint against me with the Canadian Human Rights Commission; one premised on the “contention that Arthur Topham of Quesnel, British Columbia, Canada and his internet publication known as Radicalpress.com contrive to promote ongoing hatred affecting persons identifiable as Jews and/or as citizens of Israel.” Please note the “citizens of Israel” portion. It was the first time in Canadian jurisprudence that the Jews, via their back-room manipulation of the CHRC, had arbitrarily introduced this novel addition to the Section 13 complaint; one which now included people of a foreign nation! [There are reasons why they attempted this but a thorough analysis of that particular subterfuge is beyond the scope of this article. A.T.]

While the Zionist news media, throughout its campaign to hasten the demise of Section 13, magnified its two pet Jewish “free speech” advocates to heroic proportions, the remaining hundreds of victims, once they had been tried and convicted, inevitably sank back into Zion’s media pit of silence and anonymity their identities liquidated and their unjust sufferings lost forever. Their names though are important, more important to the struggle for real freedom of speech than the media’s manufactured heroes, Steyn and Levant, for the nameless ones were the truly courageous Canadian heroes, those resisters whose who, on their own and motivated by their strong convictions, had stood up to Canada’s Marxist/Bolshevik commissars with little or no money and next to nil support from the general public while the Zio-media used all of its ill-gained media power to malign, vilify and crucify them in the public eye, just as they always do to anyone who stands in the way of their hate-filled agenda.  And so here I present the names of some of victims that I was able to find. God forgive me for the ones I’ve left off (if readers can provide me with additional names I’ll add them to my website as they emerge).

The list began with John Ross Taylor back in the late 70’s and carried on with Terry Long, Randy Johnston, William James Harcus, Wolfgang Droege, Kevin Lew, Derek J. Peterson, Tony McAleer, Charles Scott, Ernst Zundel, John Micka, Fred Kyburz, Eldon Warman, Alexan Kulbashian, James Scott Richardson, Tomasz Winnicki, Craig Harrison, Peter Kouba, Glen Bahr, Terry Tremaine, Alex Di Civita, Liz Lampman, Lubomyr Prytulak, Bobby Wilkinson, Jessica Beaumont, Melissa Guille, Ciaran Paul Donnelly, Jason Ouwendyk, Heather Fleming, Ronald Fleming, Jim Keegstra, Malcolm Ross, Doug Collins, Marc Lemire, Arthur Topham, David Ahenakew, Bill Whatcott, Mark Merek, Dean Clifford….

It must also be mentioned here that those pictured below, as well as Bill Whatcott, were all assisted in great measure by Canada’s foremost defender of true freedom of speech, the late Douglas Christie, who acted in varying capacities for all of the accused, including myself, right up to the point of his tragic passing in March of 2013.

DouglasHChristieFreedomFighter copy 3

SomeCanadianFreeSpeechVictims

In previous writings I’ve delved further into the creation of Canada’s “Hate Propaganda” laws and in every case of ongoing persecution and prosecution it was always the Jewish lobby groups in Canada who were clambering and crying for the use and retention of these anti-democratic, unconstitutional “laws” that for some strange reason, in practically 99% of all cases, involved non-Jewish individuals who were being critical of the ideology of political Zionism or the illegal, terrorist actions of the state of Israel toward the Palestinian people or else exposing the mendacious Jewish Rothschild central banking cartel that controls much of the world’s monetary system or the Jewish media cartel that controls the vast proportion of the Western world’s media and source of information. Those who were publishing critical articles were doing so because they firmly believed that their country, its government, jurisprudence, culture and social mores were under direct attack by the foreign influences of these Zionist organizations plus the choke hold that the state of Israel was gaining over Canada’s federal leaders and their parties. In other words their criticisms in many cases were based upon their personal belief and knowledge that Canada was under attack from foreign agents and that it was their constitutional right and duty to express their views on this vital matter of national security.

Charlie Hebdo and the ongoing Lies of the Jews

Juxtaposed against this background gestalt of brutal, repressive anti-Free Speech legislation (easily traced back to and premised upon the foundational lie of the 20th Century by World Jewry that “6 Million Jews” had been “holocausted” by gas and ovens in the work camps of National Socialist Germany during the latter half of WWII, a deception now proven to have been a fabricated event of mythical and universal proportions perpetrated upon humanity), Canada’s anti-Free Speech laws tended, in practically every case, to always benefit only one small minority  – the nation’s Jewish community – who amount to less that 2% of the country’s population. Thus all the present hoopla emanating from the Jewish-controlled media about “Freedom of Speech”, “free expression” and the West’s longstanding “liberal” tradition of justifiable satire for the likes of Islamophobic and Christianophobic writers, artists and publishers like Charlie Hebdo, the repulsively loathsome Jew ‘comedian’ Sarah Silverman, et al, resonates with even greater magnitude the same hollow sounds of bigotry and deception here in Canada today.

When the news began to break via Twitter on June 26th, 2013 that the Canada’s Senate had finally given third and final reading to Bill C-304, an Act to repeal the censorship provision – Section 13 – contained in the Canadian Human Rights Act this didn’t automatically signal the end of ALL of Canada’s repressive “Free Speech” legislation. Far from it. All the repeal accomplished was to removed the provisions within the Act that formerly gave non-Jews the same legal right to point a fierce and accusing finger at those of “Jewish ethnicity” who were out to destroy Canada’s socio-cultural and democratic way of life and demand that they also be held accountable for their traitorous actions against the nation in this regard. The demise, therefore, of Section 13, as far as the Zionist media was concerned, was the end of their coverage on the issue of “Freedom of Speech”. Their job was done and their own media was now far less restricted in its ability to carry on with their Islamophobic agenda of vilifying Muslims everywhere. As for the even more threatening, draconian legislation still contained within Canada’s Criminal Code under Section 318 to 320, “Hate Propaganda”, those heinous laws are still very much alive and currently being used to the max to take down my website RadicalPress.com and myself and thus set a new precedent that will undoubtedly be used to coerce any other Canadian citizen who might think they still have the right of “Freedom of Speech” to self-censor their opinions and beliefs and whatever historic research they may have uncovered that might support their viewpoint.

When you are immersed in the thick of a battle, be it to retain your constitutional right to freedom of expression or your fundamental right to stay alive physically, you quickly learn who the enemy is and what type of tactics they employ to overpower you. After eight long years of being in the trenches of what metaphorically (and some say realistically) might appropriately be called World War III and witnessing the stratagems used by the Zionist forces, it becomes clear how their modus operandi works. In actual physical warfare the Zionist forces, be they Israel attacking Gaza with their superior military firepower or the USA attacking Iraq with its superior firepower, they always resort to what they coined their “Shock and Awe” bombing power on their perceived enemy. This same strategy though is also, first and foremost, used pre-emptively when it comes to their disinformation “bombing campaign”campaigns that always precede any actual on the ground operations. In esoteric terms it exhibits the old adage, “As above, so below”.

At this stage of writing, the Charlie Hebdo narrative, for those whose minds haven’t already succumbed to the current “Shock and Awe” propaganda ordinance emanating forth from Zion’s big media guns, more than sufficient evidence now exists to prove that we’ve being subjected once again to another Israeli Mossad false flag operation; one deliberately orchestrated in order to provide the necessary media grist to carry out their latest “Free Speech” disinfo blitzkrieg designed to fool the traumatized masses into believing their lie that the massacre was carried out by “Muslim Jihadists” incensed over the magazine’s ongoing slander and mockery of Islam’s Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAWW). Nothing could be further from the truth.

As many writers have already revealed, including the American writer Dr. Paul Craig Roberts: “The Charlie Hebdo Story Simply Doesn’t Wash“. There’s just too many similarities to all the previous false flag events, including the greatest of all thus far in the 21st Century – 9/11– all of which were carried out with precisely the same global mind-control objective – the obfuscation, via dissimulation and outright LIES projected through Zion’s global media cartel, of the true motives and actions of the state of Israel, first by transforming, then transposing their wilful and ongoing acts of terrorism against the Muslim people of the Middle East into a completely opposite, inverted and deceptive narrative; one that portrays Israel (again and again) as the woefully misunderstood victim of the former “Nazi-insprired Holocaust of 6 Million Jews”  plus interminable Islamic ill-will, anti-Semitic chicanery and racist hatred, all of which is presently being focalized in the Charlie Hebdo incident in order to then justify their ultimate purpose in pulling off this latest cabalistic caper; one intended to be a “shock and awe” strike against the very foundations of freedom itself, that is, the fundamental, God-given right and necessity for every single human being on the face of this planet to be allowed to speak their mind and criticize whomever they feel may be attempting to stand in the way of this core human characteristic and all it entails in terms of keeping the principles of truth, honesty and moral rectitude alive.

By their past fruits we are able to recognize the Zionist’s present plot to disenfranchise the West of its basic human right to free expression via their entrenched “Hate Speech” laws which they themselves were instrumental in setting in place over the decades following WWII and have steadfastly refused to abolish in Canada and France and Germany and Australia and numerous other EU nations. It also explains the Zionist media’s refusal to deal with Section 318 to 320 during the many years that Section 13 was a hot topic across the Zionist news wires. The big question remains though, why are they waxing so eloquent about “Freedom of Speech” for the likes of Charlie Hebdo yet refusing to face the reality of these current, draconian “Hate Propaganda”laws; ones that fly in the face of the very principles and liberties that they are now espousing with such zealous vigour and haughtiness?

Dieudonne, Moi, Satire and Big Brother double standards

Je suis Dieudonne!! 1000 NEW

The most inescapable act of hypocrisy regarding the Zionist media’s trumpeting of “Freedom of Speech” is France’s disingenuous and despicable treatment of that nation’s famed comedian Dieudonne M’Bala M’Bala, without a doubt one of the finest and incisive minds, popular comedians and satirists alive today. The French officials’ two-faced approach of promoting Charlie Hebdo and the concept of “Freedom of Speech” and the right to satire anything satireable while at the same time going on a “Hate Speech” rampage around the country arresting anyone who so much as made a contrary peep about the manifestly obvious suspicious murders or didn’t append their “Je suis” to the proper name, not only showed the world what a bunch of hypocritical and dangerous clowns they were but also reinforced the fact that France’s government is totally under the control of seditious Zionist Jew forces.

Just recently, in a radio interview with Kevin Barrett where we were discussing the whole Dieudonne debacle, it was pointed out that what is happening to Dieudonne in France and myself here in Canada over the past eight years of ongoing harassment, arrests, libel suit threats and so on is indicative of a world-wide conspiracy to stop the flow of truthful information concerning the miserable machinations of World Jewry’s Zionist juggernaut whether it issues forth from writings on a blogsite or from out of the mouths of satirical comedians such as Dieudonne.

While it’s just fine for Charlie Hebdo to “satirize” whomever they like (but please don’t criticize Zionism or Israel) when I penned a satire on a hate-filled screed against the German people originally written by a Jewish writer, Theodore n. Kaufman, back in 1941 in his now infamous book, Germany Must Perish! and called it Israel Must Perish! the immediate reaction from the Jew lobby in Canada was to file a Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” complaint against me and my website alleging that I was calling for the genocide of the whole Jewish population! Did the satire aspect of the article elude their intellectual acumen or were they just grasping at straws in order to somehow get me arrested? Only time will tell.

Here in Canada it’s B’nai Brith International, one of Rothschild’s 19th century secret masonic brainchilds, who man Big Brother’s “hate speech” ghetto towers, sweeping the Cyberian landscape 24/7 with their search lights in an ongoing effort to spot a Truth Revealer lurking somewhere in the digital underbrush that they can then literally hunt down by simply filing a Section 319(2) “hate speech” complaint against them with whatever local “Hate Crime Team” may be available depending upon the province the patriot resides in.

BBDieuTop1000

In France they likely hide behind a different mask but regardless of the name their purpose is to spy on a nation’s citizens and rat out anyone who they think may be a danger to Zion’s ongoing subterfuge and then use that nation’s “Hate Speech” laws to prosecute the alleged “anti-Semitic” victim.

The notion of satire has to be the biggest joke of all when viewed within the context of the current feigned fuss over free expression and the Charlie Hebdo false flag. For the Zionist Jew media the right to be able to publish endless lies, hatred, pornography, Islamophobia, Christianophobia – all of which mock everything that humanity has held sacred for millennia – is foremost and nothing illustrates this fact more than the government/media’s full-scale promotion of the latest edition of Charlie Hebdo that came out within practically a week following the demise of its former staff. Touting this deliberate act of further promoting a magazine whose contents supposedly were responsible for the deaths of around a dozen or more people as “Freedom of Speech” has to be one of the more provocative examples of Jewish chutzpah ever witnessed, yet, thanks to such sinister machinations this jaded, derelict crime syndicate comprised of interminable moral reprobates and serial killers were then able to utilize their widespread media sorcery to cast their evil spell over millions of French citizens thus manipulating them into believing their absurd lies while at the same time dashing about the country arresting others who were theoretically exercising these same, supposed “freedoms”.

As a Christian I’ve observed the artistic, literary and mimetic actions of the Jews when it comes to “satirizing” non-Jewish religions, their churches, their leaders or their saints and I’ve seen with my own eyes too many examples of what they consider to be “free expression” and “satire” disguised as “modern art” or “satire” yet, upon closer examination reveal themselves to be nothing more than lurid, depraved exhibitions of pornographic, scatological/sexual perversion and deviancy, reprehensible to the eye and an affront to one’s spiritual and moral sense of propriety. And when I witness such moral obscenity associated with their “artistic” creations I can only conclude and agree with those who state that the ideology of political Zionism is, at its root, immoral, atheistic and demonic in nature and cannot be connected to anything truly spiritual or holy in the traditional sense of those terms.

That said it behooves me to further add that, given all of the revulsion, disrespect, contempt and derision that much of what Zion vainly attempts to portray as “art” and “satire” entails, what is even more insulting, outrageous and unjust, is the fact that, after appointing themselves the arbiters of all things permissible, including the right to insult and denigrate anyone that they so wish to (for whatever purposes), they then turn around and create, promulgate and rigidly uphold so-called “Hate Speech” laws that exist only to prohibit, by the force of the state, anyone else from exercising these same identical freedoms which they sell to the gullible public as universal rights and freedoms!  Put in layman’s language there can never be such a thing as a level playing field when it comes to “Freedom of Speech” if, as in Orwell’s Animal Farm, some people are more free to say what they want than others.

Allow me to present some examples. As a Christian I’ll use two ‘cartoons’ from Charlie Hebdo that relate to spreading Christianophobia or anti-Christian, anti-God hate propaganda rather than adding to the already existing plethora of specious, Zionist hate-motivated Islamophobic “art”. To wit:

 

CharHebGod

The Babylonian Talmud, the “bible” of the Rabbinical cult we associate with “Judaism”, consists of massive tomes of Jewish “Law” purported (by the priesthood) to have been handed down orally to Moses by the Jewish “g-d” Jehovah in the self-chosen people’s hoary past. Then, with the addition of greater masses of written commentary on said law, finally set in print around the 5th century A.D. The Talmud considered to be the ultimate authority and reference when it comes to any and all questions dealing with the religious life of an orthodox Jew supersedes the Torah in all aspects of authority.

Hidden for centuries from the prying eyes of non-Jews the Talmud was eventually translated into English in the early part of the 20th Century. Not long afterward an American author and researcher, Elizabeth Dilling, began a comprehensive study of the Talmud after returning from a visit to the Soviet Union in 1931 where she had gone to observe what the Zio-Communists were then touting as their great “humanitarian experiment”. Being able to go behind the scenes Dilling was, “shocked at the forced labor, the squalid living quarters, and deplorable living conditions, and the atmosphere of fear created by the Soviet dictatorship.” But even more so was she shocked by the “virulent anti-Christianity of the atheist Communist regime.”

Had Dilling been able, at the time, to penetrate further into the vast reaches of the Soviet wastelands she would have witnessed what, thanks to the heroic efforts of Russia’s Nobel Prize winning author and dissident Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, he described as the greatest mass genocide of Gentile Russian Christians ever undertaken in the history of the world. According to Solzhenitsyn somewhere in the neighbourhood of sixty-six million souls vanished into that frozen nightmare of terror and fear now known as the Gulag Archipelago.

SolzhenitsynGulagZioHatredquote 800

Dillings book, THE JEWISH RELIGION: Its Influence Today is a wealth of factual information on the hidden side of Pharisiac Judaism. Chapter 3 in particular, “The Talmud and Bible Believers” examines in detail how the Rabbinical priesthood views the likes of Jesus Christ and Mother Mary; both of whom are treated with the utmost contempt and disrespect. When one realizes just how vile and hateful the passages are describing Jesus and his Mother it’s not too difficult to connect the dots when it comes to understanding why this book, which is posted on my website RadicalPress.com in digital format (and numerous other websites around the world), was one of the principal documents submitted by the “complainants” in my present case as “proof” that I am willfully promoting hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group”. Still, as the old saying goes, “The proof is in the pudding” and in the case of the Gulag Archipelago that pudding is stuffed to overflowing with the bloated and starved carcasses of countless millions of innocent people.

As such it beggars the mind to think that BC’s Attorney General, the Honourable Suzanne Anton, would have attached her name to such a sleazy and ill-conceived accusation; one that eventually led the thought police to proceed with their stalking and final arrest and jailing that then allowed them to illegally enter my home and steal all of my computers and electronic files and subsequently subject me to years of ongoing litigation in order to prove my innocence. This “law” we call Section 319(2) is a purely Bolshevik-inspired piece of Zionist double-talk and deception that allows the state to accuse me (or any other Canadian) of willfully promoting hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” for simply re-posting historical facts gleaned from the annals of the former Zionist Jew dominated Soviet dictatorship.

ChHebJesus

Upon reading what the Talmud has to say about Jesus Christ and Mother Mary it won’t take a whole lot of extrapolating to see why the Talmud-driven Zionist media commissars are still going out of their way to defend the likes of images such as these. Just like the New York Times, Charlie Hebdo’s messages appear to be  exactly what the Zionist media cartel deems content “fit to print”. I will leave it to viewers to decide whether they see these ‘cartoons’ as satire, humour or otherwise. They certainly aren’t the ones though that the Zionist media has been flashing about since the Charlie Hebdo incident.

One of the National Post’s well known Jewish writers, Andrew Coyne, in the comment section of its January 15, 2015 edition, penned an article entitled, “Humour busts taboos” (currently changed online to read: “Coyne: Everything can be laughed about, because everything can be discussed”) wherein he labours to intellectually justify the “humour” associated with Charlie Hebdo and Jewish ‘comedians’ such as Sarah Silverman (Coyne finds her humour “indefensibly funny”) who get their jollies out of telling anti-Christian jokes such as the example below:

 

Screen Shot 2015-01-17 at 11.45.31 PM

British Internet writer and contributor to Veteran’s Today, Lasha Darkmoon, also has a few pertinent things to say about Silverman in her recent and popular article, “The Paris Massacre: they had it coming” where she writes,  “The Jewish comedienne Sarah Silverman, the nice young lady who likes humping dogs and licking their anuses in various video skits—see here—and who gets many a cheap laugh by insulting Christianity in America, would have been a great hit with these satirical French journalists. They would have loved her for saying, “I hope the Jews DID kill Christ! I’d fucking do it again—in a second!”.

Coyne on the other hand, quoting François Cavanna, founder of Charlie Hebdo, who once stated, “Nothing is sacred” goes on to say, “I have been turning over those words in my mind ever since I saw them, shortly after the massacre. Can he really have meant it? Nothing is sacred? Why? Why was he so insistent, so absolute? …But I think it is more than that. I think it stems from an understanding that “offensive” humour is not an aberration, a warped version of the real thing, but rather that offensiveness of one kind or another is an intrinsic part of humour. Virtually all humour is offensive to someone; most humour is hurtful to some sensibility; much humour is rooted in pain and fear and the ugly reality of things.”

In his analysis of why people laugh, he tells us, “Nobody really knows why people laugh. They just do.” … “What one can say, however, is that it [laughter] emerges from some fundamentally healthy part of us.”

So I ask myself, why didn’t I laugh when I looked at the Charlie Hebdo image of God the Father being bum-phucked by my Lord Jesus Christ who, in turn, is having his own derriere desecrated by what is supposed to be a symbolic image of the Holy Spirit? The standard interpretation for Jews like Coyne would be that it’s apparently just a pun (satire) on the Catholic church’s opposition to gay marriage. No problem. Get over it guys. It’s all just “a joke”. Remember, “Nothing is sacred” and the laughter produced by such “satire” obviously “emerges from some fundamentally healthy part of us.”

But if you don’t find it funny at all and rather offensive then according to Coyne’s reasoning “…that’s also the moral answer. The first thing to ask about a joke is not, is it offensive, but: is it funny? If it is, if we laugh at it in spite of ourselves, chances are it is because there is something else to it than mere insult or grotesquerie: some larger truth, some point we resist acknowledging, because to do so would make us uncomfortable.” [Note: all emphasis throughout this article is by the author. A.T.]

Really now Andrew? Oi vey! I should truly like to know just what it is, what “larger truth” is hidden there that we, who don’t laugh at supposed ‘cartoons’ such as this, “resist acknowledging” because it would “make us uncomfortable”? How about the “larger truth” that the atheistic Zionist mindset could care less about what Christians or Muslims hold to be sacred? Is this not their standard operating procedure today just as it was after the overthrow of Czar Nicholas of Russia in 1917 when the Jew-led Bolsheviks systematically went about raping and murdering and torturing the Christian priests and nuns and destroying their houses of worship on a scale that, were it fully disclosed to the masses today on the Zionist media, would turn the stomachs of whole nations to the point where their present belief in your endless lies would suddenly cease to exist?

Commenting on Sarah Silverman’s career Coyne says, “If her routine were only about shock value, I don’t imagine she would have lasted as long as she has. Rather, she has thought long and hard about what makes us anxious — what we’re least willing to talk about.”

So, according to the atheistic Zionist mind-set of Jewish writers like Coyne, if someone has expended a lot of mental energy trying to figure out how to make Christians “anxious” about homos marrying homos by forcing them to talk about it through portraying their Saviour screwing God the Father up the ass, then this is a good thing. A funny thing. A laughter producing mechanism that gets the desired result “by turning our anxieties and discomforts in on themselves, forcing us to confront them rather than bury them.” Sigmund, I’m certain, would have been proud of Andrew Coyne’s deeply analytical diagnosis of Sarah Silverman’s perverted, sick mind.

Then of course, as Coyne goes on to say, “There’s a world of meaning in this. When an “offensive” comic says nothing is unsayable, they mean that we do not have to be afraid of words. They are not our master: we are theirs. Everything can be laughed about, because everything can be discussed.”

Now this is all fine and dandy for Andrew Coyne and his Jewish comedians and the National Post and its readership who subscribe to this type of psycho-babble purporting to be wisdom but, like all babble that arises in the Zionist media, it only caters to the self-chosen mindset, be it ethnic Jews or culturally and socially indoctrinated “mentally-cloned” chabez goy “Jews” who, because of their own life experiences growing up in a culture saturated with endless Zionist propaganda, have come to think and react and behave just like their Zionist counterparts.

But of course for all of Coyne’s sophisticated rhetoric and sophistry, specifically designed to make an ugly pile of dog shit look like a fruit cake, his arguments in favour of justifying what is nothing more than pure pornography, an “art” and an industry which the the Jews have developed to the point of perfection and now reap countless millions from its exploitation via their mass media, don’t impress me one iota.

But, and believe me when I say this is a BIG BUT (no pun or typo intended), there are the rest of us great unwashed goyim who amount to not millions but billions, who for numerous reasons don’t think at all like the Zionists would have us think. We have our own codes of moral conduct and our own spiritual views and perspectives on what we believe to be the holy and sacred side of life here on planet Earth. And yes, we also value justice and freedom of speech just like the Zionists purport to value it. Nonetheless, there is a vast and fundamental separation between the Zionist version of freedom of speech and that of the non-Zionist; a difference based upon the elemental fact that non-Zionists believe in freedom of speech for EVERYONE, not just for the Zionist Jews and their fawning sycophants who, for whatever reason, feel that Zion’s version of TRUTH and FREEDOM is somehow the only version permissible for the whole of humanity. Therein lies the rub and therein lies the one single factor that historically has made the “Jewish Question” one of continuing paramount importance for all of mankind and, as far back as a century ago, prompted the late Henry Ford, Sr. to describe this amazing occurrence with the Jews as “The world’s Foremost Problem”.

HenryQuotesTemplate 600

Given a level playing field in all the critical sectors of a nation that comprise government, banking, economics, industry, education, social and religious institutions and most important of all, openness and diversity within the most crucial area – its media/news/entertainment/communication systems – the majority of citizens in any democratic nation would have the wherewithal to manage their country for the good of all rather than be held hostage to a tiny deviant minority that now rules over us with greater and greater disregard for the essential values that do make life both sacred and worthwhile. This is a lesson that the Zionists and their obeisant sycophants are still in denial about. For the majority it’s but a matter of ignorance due to their brainwashing and were they to be told the whole truth would likely change their ways but for those in power who manage the levers of deception it’s not so much a matter of denial but one of cold, calculated, wilful, heartless premeditated criminal intent to perpetrate and perpetuate their execrable program to enslave the vast majority of humanity via the ongoing misuse of their media cartel and other control mechanisms.

Some final thoughts on Canada’s PM Stephen Harper and “Freedom of Speech”

Saving the worst for last and not wishing to subject readers to more obnoxious imagery I will forgo posting a photo of Canada’s No. 1 Zionist lackey and current Prime Minister of Canada, the Dishonourable Stephen Harper.

Before commenting on his recent reaction to the Charlie Hebdo affair I want to reiterate a fact that needs to be born in mind with respect to my legal proceedings now before the court. On April 27th, 2011, about one week prior to the last federal election, being fully conscious of the imminent threat that Harper posed to my country should his Conservative party gain a majority vote and be given the opportunity to exercise h/is-rael’s agenda via their controlled puppet, I penned an article titled, Hating Harper and posted it to my website. There you will find an image of the traitor who is now attempting to tell Canadians what a wonderful, free and democratic nation they live in; one that, were it not for those insanely envious ‘Mooslim’ terrorist Jihadists who hate our way of life, would have us all living just happy as a clam. When I wrote the article I knew full well what Canada would be facing should Stephen Harper and his Con-servative Party gain a majority of votes necessary to rule the country for next four years.

The very next day, Canada’s former No. 1 serial complainant in the vast majority of the now repealed Sec. 13 “Human Rights” cases (please note that I am under a court order NOT to publish his name anywhere on the net), filed a Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” complaint with the BC Hate Crime Team under the supervision of Det. Cst. Terry Wilson pictured below along with his partner in crime Cst. Normandie Levas. That was the first step taken in a long drawn-out clandestine process that eventually culminated in my arrest and incarceration on May 16th, 2012.

The BC Hate Crime Team’s website tells us that it “has two full-time police officers trained to recognize the specialized and multi-jurisdictional nature of hate propaganda offences.”  It was one of those “trained” police officers, Cst. Levas, who filed a report with BC Attorney General, Hon. Suzanne Anton, outlining her reasons why she felt I had committed the unforgivable crime of “willfully promoting hatred against people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” by, (quoting Det. Cst. Wilson’s words to me while I was in jail), “calling for the total genocide of the Jewish population”. Based on this “trained” police officer’s  “evidence” the Attorney General then gave their consent to have me formally charged. Later on, during the preliminary inquiry when I cross examined Cst. Levas in court about her “training” and what it was that qualified her to make such presumptive and false accusations about me, she revealed to the court that prior to joining the “Hate Crime Team” she had worked as a . . . dental assistant!

NewWilsonPhoto

Returning to the Charlie Hebdo hoax and that other hoax, the Zionist National Post, I want to make further reference to an article that appeared on the front page of the January 9, 2015 edition titled, “THIS IS WAR ON US ALL, HARPER SAYS: PM says terror law to be tabled soon.” (My apologies to readers but I’ve been unable to find a link to the article online)

Before the blood had dried on the two young Muslim brothers alleged to have carried out the shootings at the office of Charlie Hebdo then subsequently murdered by the French security forces in order to ensure that they would never have the opportunity to tell their side of the story, Canada’s Zionist-controlled puppet, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, was already blabbering on in the media about how the “jihadists are at war with anyone who values openness and tolerance” and further stating that his government was already busy formulating new proposed legislation that would introduce “new arrest powers aimed at thwarting terrorist threats” in an upcoming bill destined to be tabled at the end of January when Parliament resumes.

He then went on to say, “They have declared war and are already executing it on a massive scale on a whole range of countries with which they are in contact, and they have declared war on any country, like ourselves(sic), that values freedom, openness and tolerance. We may not like this and wish it would go away, but it is not going to go away.

Yes, Stephen Harper, you can be damn sure that these false flag events such as we’ve just witnessed in Paris, France won’t “go away” so long as the wars which your government has plunged Canada into at the behest of Israel are slated to carry on and the necessity to manufacture greater and greater levels of fear remain a prerequisite to gaining approval for your heinous acts of genocide against defenceless people like the Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank, the Afghans and those still surviving in other Middle East nations where the Zionist forces are constantly committing their war crimes.

Making these hypocritically absurd pronouncements given the fact that there was still no definite proof as to who had committed the murders merely shows the insidiousness and transparent bigotry of those in power who, because they are puppets dangling on Zionist strings, will mouth their aggressive lies and threats to the world regardless of whatever the people may think to the contrary. This process of accusing either an individual or a nation of crimes yet unproven applies not only to the Islamic community as a whole but to my own “Freedom of Speech” case here at home in Canada and now before the Supreme court of British Columbia. The fact that I have yet to be tried for the alleged “crime” of “willfully promoting hatred against people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” certainly didn’t deter the Zionist media in Canada from making all sorts of false and defamatory accusations and slanderous remarks against my person when the Indictment was first handed down November 5, 2012. The same Zionist big mouth, Ezra Levant, was only too happy to interview my former counsel, Douglas Christie on his SunNews show “The Source” where he then proceeded to accuse me of all sorts of falsehoods just like Harper does when it comes to discussing issues to do with Islam and Israel’s false flag events all of which are designed to further enhance just such vitriolic rhetoric.

Within the short span of about six minutes good ol’ free speech advocate Ezra Levant managed to slander, defame and libel me as many times as possible, punctuating every comment or question to lawyer Doug Christie with at least one or more ad hominem slur,  in order to show the world just how grand and liberal the Zionist mainstream media truly is when it comes to freedom of expression.

Screen Shot 2014-02-22 at 4.55.45 PM

Yes, said Ezra, that Topham is an “anti-Semite.” He’s “offensive” and an “anti-Zionist [which is] code for anti-Semitic.” His website is “gross” and his comments “repulsive” and everything that he does is “motivated by a form of malice.” And on top of that Levant also shared freely his opinion that I was a “nobody” and an “anti-Semitic idiot and a right wing wacko” ending his “freedom of speech” soliloquy by emphatically pronouncing to all of Canada that when it came right down to it “I HATE ARTHUR TOPHAM!”

When I finished watched the interview I said to myself, oi vey! with “free speech” friends like this who needs enemies? Here he is, one of Canada’s most vocal advocates for “freedom of speech” on the Internet and he’s sitting there abusing me left, right and center telling the world blatant lies about me and making me out to be some sort of crazed Jew-hating anti-Semite! That folks is how “Freedom of Speech” works for those holding the mechanisms of mind-control in their nefarious little hands.

Getting back to Harper and his disingenuous statements to the media he goes on to say, “At the same time, we also encourage people to go about their lives and to exercise our rights and freedoms and our openness as a society as loudly and as clear as we can because that is the best way of defeating what is ultimately a movement of hatred and intolerance.” “No shit Batman” as a friend of mine used to say when confronted with such transparent posturing. That is precisely what I and many other Canadians have been doing for decades. And were we able to “exercise our rights and freedoms” without the Jewish lobbyists using their “Hate Propaganda” laws to attack and imprison us? No. Just more hypocritical smoke and mirrors and sententious sophistry that’s all.

Commenting on the Paris demonstrations that followed in the wake of the shootings Harper, monotonously mouthing the Zionist agenda rather than taking into consideration ALL Canadians, displayed his now usual chutzpah by stating, “Today, I know all Canadians…stand together with [Israel? A.T.] the people of France…our great friends and allies” culminating his bigoted remarks with his final fatuous remark that, “When a trio of [alleged. A.T.] hooded men struck at some of our most cherished democratic principles – freedom of expression,  freedom of the press – they assaulted democracy everywhere.”

Talk is obviously cheap and meaningless when a nation’s leader can make such blatantly deceptive statements to the press and the so-called “independent” media stands by unquestioningly allowing it to go on.

Conclusion

So what are we to make of this latest false flag event that occurred in Paris, France? Will the world fall for it like most people fell for the 9/11 false flag and continue on supporting those who are the perpetrators of the majority of mankind’s problems? How long will the pretense last before the mask of Zion finally falls from the face of evil, revealing forever the primary source of mankind’s collective woes and allowing for the final liberation of the millions of people still suffering from the ignorance that’s ultimately a result of having lived their lives in a trauma-induced trance of fear and insecurity; products of deliberate mind-control by a globally elite force of psychopaths who truly believe that they were given the right by their G_d to wield unlimited power and control over the majority of humanity? How long before the majority of Jews themselves will be healed of this devastating ghetto consciousness that’s plagued the world for over two millennia?

For most people today the realization that they are going about their lives unaware of the fact that there’s a war going on around them designed to eventually enslave them is beyond belief. They simply remain transfixed by Big Brother’s media, struggle on a daily basis to pay their credit card debts and keep food on the table and a roof over their heads all the while faithfully watching the sitcoms and television news and sports and a myriad number of channels all designed with the intent of diverting their attention away from the psycho/spiritual battles that are going on behind the scenes both in Cyberspace (the Internet) where the final battle is now well underway as well as in the courtrooms of the nation where the Zionist forces are surreptitiously at work both enacting new legislation and protecting old legislation like Section 318 to 320 of Canada’s Criminal Code, laws overtly and covertly designed to  criminalize the Truth Revealers who are on to their scams and are doing their utmost with scant resources to strike the chimes of truth and freedom and connect the dots so that the majority of those still asleep might one day awaken.

Make no mistake about it. The Zionists KNOW their days are numbered and that time is fast running out for them to pull off their global coup. The fact that they know though is not something that will automatically tempt them to change their evil ways. That’s not how psychopaths operate. The stronger the resistance to their plotting and scheming the more they dig their heels in and resort to greater and greater subterfuges to prevent the tide of truth from rising. They understand better than anyone the power of their media and the power of their purse and they will not stop using either of these devices to achieve the end they’ve worked for so long and with such single-minded, albeit, malicious  intent.

It may be pointless at this juncture in the battle to remind people that this war has been going on since Lucifer first broke rank with the heavenly hosts and decided that he would rather be God and do his own thing instead of remaining a willing and loving participant in the grand scheme of Creation. God of course, having endowed all of his Creation, from the heavenly realms down to us mundane time-space mortal creatures of flesh and blood with free will wasn’t about to interfere with his design and so left his somewhat recalcitrant and sentient family to work it out on their own.

The debate over who the Zionists really are and why they’re motivated to act as they do would fill a thousand Alexandrian libraries. The origins of such primal urges to control others cannot help but lead serious thinkers to an eventual realization that such questions ultimately cannot be answered without delving into speculative philosophical, occult and spiritual realms that go far beyond the scope of this article.

The Internet at this early juncture in its nascent beginnings is already expanding at quantum speeds. The information age is gaining ground with every millisecond, exploding our preconceived notions of time and space and taking us on a transcendental journey that at this point in time is akin in terms of progress to our little toe projecting out upon the threshold of a dream that undoubtedly will continue to unfold throughout the remainder of the present Aquarian cycle, leading us onward and inward to greater and greater understanding, peace, harmony, and love.

Together humanity now faces the supreme trial of all ages past. We stand as a vast human species with one foot embedded in yesterday  and the other foot jutting forth into a future that all too often appears shrouded in grey, chemtrail-like clouds of self doubt brought forth daily through the interminable Big Brother’s flak of fear and loathing which constitute the hallmarks of the Zionist Information Media now permanently acting in collusion with its counterparts in every other phase of global involvement who are intent on breaking the will of the people to the point where they eventually give up and bow their heads to accept their chains of slavery and subservience to the satanic power  that now rules the world by default.

Bob_Dylan_-_The_Times_They_Are_A-Changin'

Bob Dylan, one of the leading American Jewish poets, songwriters and musicians of the 1960’s prophetically expressed best our current existential dilemma when, in 1964 he wrote his immortal song, “The Times They Are A-Changing”. I publish it here for readers to consider.

Come gather ’round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You’ll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you is worth savin’
Then you better start swimmin’ or you’ll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin’

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won’t come again
And don’t speak too soon
For the wheel’s still in spin
And there’s no tellin’ who that it’s namin’
For the loser now will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin’

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside and it is ragin’
It’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don’t criticize
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is rapidly agin’
Please get out of the new one if you can’t lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin’

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is rapidly fadin’
And the first one now will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’

The glorious sun of Truth and Justice is now rising upon an otherwise outwardly bleak, forlorn, terror-stricken Cyberian landscape according to divine plan, casting great shadows across the wreckage of thousands of years of endless war and strife and suffering. Its radiant rays of life-giving hope are bursting forth with new and brighter intensity than ever before, defying with the full intensity of its love-driven will and determination all of the Evil and Darkness emanating forth from the present Zio-Talmudic tyranny now so frantic with fear and desperately attempting to pull off its age-long plan for absolute control of planet Earth.

In the end Truth and Love and Peace WILL prevail.

—–

 

Ursula Haverbeck “The Greatest Problem of Our Time” w/ English Subtitles

Ursula HaverbeckVideoHdr

CLICK HERE TO VIEW VIDEO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BvRvNZo5Gk

Editors Note: 86 year old German Ursula Haverbeck identifies the root source of much of the problems that the world faces with respect to history and truth and the greatest lie ever foisted upon humankind – a lie that is directly responsible for the creation of Canada’s so-called “Hate Propaganda” laws sec. 318 to 320 of the Canadian Criminal Code which ultimately led to my arrest and incarceration in May of 2012. This “Greatest Problem” is crucial to a proper understanding of Canada’s civil and human rights. The “Holocaust Lie” is now a proven fraud of massive proportions for which the Zionist Jews are directly responsible.

The Holocaust Narrative: Politics Trumps Science   by Jim Fetzer

Screen Shot 2014-11-27 at 11.09.04 PMScreen Shot 2014-11-28 at 12.13.38 AM

“The fastest way to get expelled from a British university is by saying you are looking at chemical evidence for how Zyklon was used in World War II, with a discussion of how delousing technology functioned in the German World War II labour camps”—Nicholas Kollerstrom

Breaking-the-Spell-front-cover

For more on the book, click BREAKING THE SPELL

The author of this refreshing scientific study of the Holocaust, Nicholas Kollerstrom, may be the most honorable man whom I have ever had the pleasure to know.

In response to PM David Cameron’s denunciation of 7/7 and 9/11 skeptics as on a par with ISIS, he went to Scotland Yard with a copy of Terror on the Tube (3rd ed., 2011) and turned himself in.

Scotland Yard declined the honor, but this act–which symbolically castrated the PM’s outrageous stance–was a striking illustration of his ability to tackle a problem by going right at it.

A distinguished historian of science with multiple degrees, including from Cambridge, he has published on 9/11 and especially 7/7, about which he appears to be the world’s leading expert.

When his attention turned to research on the use of Zykon B as a delousing agent in the labor camps run by the Germans during World War II, however, he was treated as an outcast.

He lost his position at University College London, which he had held for 15 years, where university officials did not bother to extend the opportunity of a rebuttal before they sacked him.

He and I both spoke at the recent conference, “Academic Freedom: Are there limits to inquiry? JFK, 9/11 and the Holocaust”, where this book reports the results of the research for which he was banned. The book, a stunning historic expose, has just appeared. I endorse it with my highest recommendation.

The Holocaust – Myth and Reality

The situation is completely absurd. No subject generates responses as extreme and irrational as what has come to be known as “the Holocaust”. Unlike any other event in human history, including even the most sacred religious beliefs, for anyone to question, dispute or deny its occurrence qualifies as “a hate crime,” where Holocaust denial is even a prosecutable offense in certain jurisdictions. Unlike any other, this crime involves the expression of forbidden thoughts about a subject that has become taboo.

236-references-before-Nuremberg

The underlying desideratum is whether history is supposed to be accurate and true or, as Voltaire has put it, be merely “a pack of lies the living play upon the dead”. Just so we know what we are talking about: In its broadest outlines, “the Holocaust” can be defined by means of its three primary elements, which I shall designate here as hypotheses (h1), (h2) and (h3):

(h1) that Hitler was attempting to exterminate the Jews and succeeded by putting around 6,000,000 to death;

(h2) that many of those deaths were brought about by the use of cyanide gas in chambers for that purpose; and,

(h3) that the chemical agent that brought about those deaths was Zykon B, to which the victims were subjected.

The science of the Holocaust does not leave any room for doubt about (h2) and (h3), since laws of biochemistry and of materials science—laws which cannot be violated and cannot be changed—entail that the bodies of those who are put to death using cyanide turn pink, while the walls of chambers used for that purpose would turn blue. But none of the bodies from those camps has been reported to have been pink; and examination of the “gas chambers” has determined that none of them turned blue. Which means that (h2) and (h3) are not simply false but have been scientifically refuted.

Holocaust science “cut and dried”

As Nicholas Kollerstrom documents in this astonishing and brilliant book, the science of the Holocaust is this “cut and dried”. To the extent to which the Holocaust narrative depends on (h2) and (h3), therefore, it cannot be sustained. The questions that remain about (h1) are a bit more complex but appear to be equally contrived. There are more than 236 references to 6,000,000 Jews who are either in acute distress or about to be assailed in the newspapers of the world prior to the Nuremberg Tribunal— the first of which appeared in 1890. The number seems to have no basis in fact but to have theological origins—from a disputed passage in Leviticus—as to how many Jews must perish before they can return to “The Promised Land”.

Recently-released-records-ICRC

To the extent to which the number of Jews who died in the camps can be objectively determined, the most reliable numbers appear to come from the records of the International Committee of the Red Cross, which visited the camps and kept meticulous records of the identities of those who died and their cause of death. Not one is reported to have been put to death in gas chambers, and the total it reported in 1993 for all of the camps was 296,081 combined. Even rounding up to an even 600,000 victims—gypsies, Jews and the mentally and physically infirm—the empirical evidence thus contradicts the contention that 6,000,000 Jews were put to death and thereby falsifies hypothesis (h1).

Counting deaths attributed to the Holocaust—apart from the records of the International Committee of the Red Cross—turns out to be an exercise in “fuzzy math”, because none of them add up. As Faurisson observed during an interview on 13 December 2006, the Yad Vashem database was built up by “simple unverified declarations emanating from unverified sources and processed in such a way that one and the same person can be recorded as having died several times, even, it seems, as many as ten times”.[1] And even the most complete archives are not collated to make total numbers accessible but only individual cases—which appears an obvious measure to preserve the untestability of (h1), the hypothesis that 6,000,000 Jews had perished.

Holocaust story falsified

So, insofar as we depend upon empirical evidence and laws of science, the Holocaust story appears to be false and cannot be sustained. The question that therefore arises is how the Nuremberg Tribunal—widely cited as a paragon of intellectual integrity and of the application of moral principles to historical events—could possibly have produced such a highly misleading account of crucial events at the conclusion of World War II. The answer to this, I believe, has been provided by Robert Faurisson in his paper “Against Hollywoodism, Revisionism,” who explains the daunting task confronting the Allies to conceal or justify war crimes that they had committed in winning the war.[2]

Effects-of-Allied-Bombing

The Allies’ systematic and massive destruction of German cities not only brought about the deaths of hundreds of thousands of German civilians but also interdicted the railroad lines that would have re-supplied those camps, which were located near major industrial plants and whose inmates were providing labor to run them. It would have been poor business practice to exterminate the work force, but the large number of deaths from starvation because the Third Reich could not re-supply them provided an opportunity to deflect responsibility from the Allies onto Germany, which the Allies seized. A Hollywood director was brought in and shot 80,000 feet of film at the camps, where 6,000 feet (7.5% of the total) was used to shift the blame for those deaths onto Nazi Germany, which was an easy sell, all things considered.

As Kollerstrom explains, Zyklon B was used at the labor camps, not as a method of extermination but for the sake of maintaining hygiene among the inmates. Typhus and dysentery were omnipresent problems, where Zyklon B was applied in copious quantities—but as a disinfestant, not as an agent for bringing about the deaths of millions of inmates. And in response to the color pink-and-blue findings, an alternative explanation has been given that they were killed using diesel exhaust fumes, but unlike carbon monoxide, diesel exhaust fumes bring about nausea and severe headaches but usually do not bring about death by asphyxiation.

Classified British documents

Among the most valuable contributions of this study derives from Nick’s use of classified records acquired by British authorities, who were skeptical of claims that mass gassings were being carried out and had reports in hand of the use of Zyklon for the purpose of delousing the inmates, where infestations had become alarming. Many tons of Zyklon were consumed at Auschwitz-Birkenau from the summer of 1942 on, as Kollerstrom reports, which is easy to confirm because it soaked into the walls of the disinfestation chambers and is still there. His essays on the subject—“The Walls of Auschwitz”, “Leuchter Twenty Years On” and “The Auschwitz Gas Chamber Illusion”[3]—would become the cause of his removal from a post-doctoral post he had held for 15 years!

Piles-of-bodies1

As a professional philosopher of science, I appreciate Nick’s references to Sir Karl Popper, who advocated the method of falsificationism, whereby the truth of theories in science and in history can be tested by attempts to falsify them. When they resist our best efforts to refute them, then we have good reason to believe they might be true. But equally applicable here are the reflections of Imre Lakatos, who discussed research programs with hard cores of claims,[4] such as Newton’s laws of motion or, in the case we are considering, the above-mentioned hypotheses (h1), (h2) and (h3). When the defenders of these hypotheses are confronted by the risk of refutation, they can appeal to auxiliary hypotheses in an attempt to deflect the refuting data and thereby preserve their theory.

A stellar example arises in the context of the attempt to explain away why the number of those who died as substantiated by the meticulous records of the Red Cross supports the inference that less than 10% of the 6,000,000 claimed actually died from all causes—and none from death in gas chambers. To cope with that finding, the claim has been made that the records are incomplete because large numbers of Jews were taken directly to the gas chambers and never registered—not even by name. Not only are contentions of this kind unfalsifiable, untestable and hence unscientific, but they reflect the degenerating character of the Holocaust paradigm, which has spawned no new data or research that could possibly overcome the mountain of evidence against it.

Excluding falsifying data

Another method for immunizing a hypothesis from refutation is by the exclusion of falsifying data.[5] The defenders of hypotheses (h1)-(h3) have committed a mind-boggling example of fallacious science, which further manifests their commitment to a degenerating research program. When the Auschwitz museum was confronted with the fact that the innocuous delousing chambers at Auschwitz have blue walls—due to being saturated with blue iron cyanide compounds—but the alleged homicidal gas chambers have not, they commissioned their own chemical research. Instead of testing wall samples for the chemicals that had caused the blue stains, the researchers they commissioned simply excluded those chemicals from their analysis by employing a procedure that could not detect them.[6]

They justified this measure with the claim that they did not understand exactly how these compounds could form and that they might therefore be mere artifacts. Researchers who don’t understand what they are investigating have no business becoming involved. In this case, however, it appears to be deliberate. They have deliberately ignored an obvious explanation—that Zyklon B was only used for delousing—which would have remedied their lack of comprehension.[7] As a result of this failure to adhere to the principles of science, they produced a report of no scientific value, which they used to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.[8]

Origin-of-the-myth-of-the-6000000-320x246

That Nicholas Kollerstrom was booted from his post at University College, London—and without any hearing or opportunity to present his defense, where the truth of his observations, one might have thought, would have made a difference—is one of a large number of indications that even our best academic institutions and societies are not capable of dealing objectively with the history of World War II. Indeed, it struck me like a bolt of lightning out of the blue when, during a talk by Gilad Atzmon in Madison, Wisconsin, about Jewish identity politics, I realized that the Holocaust mythology benefits Zionism and the government of Israel by playing, in the promotion of its political agenda, upon a Western sense of guilt for the death of 6,000,000 Jews during World War II.

The claim that someone is “anti-Semitic” or a “Holocaust denier” is taken to be the most severe form of ethical damnation possible in this time and age. But distinctions must be drawn between criticism of the acts and policies of the Israeli government and discounting the worth or value of human beings on the basis of their ethnic origins or religious orientation. Condemning the Israeli government for its vicious and unwarranted onslaught of the people of Gaza, for example, is not “anti-Semitic”. And if exposing the Holocaust narrative as political propaganda makes one a “Holocaust denier,” all of us who put truth before politics ought to wear that label as a badge of honor.

The ISIS fiasco

As an illustration of the depths of depravity of those who would uphold the myth, consider that, as an historian of science, Kollerstrom was invited to contribute three entries—including that on Sir Isaac Newton, which is the most important—to the Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers (2007), which has more than 1550 entries by some 400 authors from 40 countries. Yet Noel M. Swerdlow of the University of Chicago, a reviewer for Isis, the journal of America’s History of Science Society, recommended that the book be sent back to the publisher and pulped because Kollerstrom had been involved in research on the Holocaust! This was such an outrage that I wrote to the editorial board of Isis, which allowed a Letter to the Editor to appear.

BEAcover

Something is terribly wrong, when the world’s leading society on the history of science does no more to correct a grotesque abuse by one of its reviewers on a book that involved so many contributors and an enormous investment in time and money, where the moral issues are so blatant and obvious. It is ironic that the Nuremberg Tribunal would declare “collective punishment” a war crime. The Allies were responsible for the collective punishment of German civilians by their systematic bombing of German cities. Isis has committed a comparable intellectual crime by tolerating collective punishment of 400 scholars for the purported offenses of one. By acquiescing to its reviewer’s abuse, Isis has committed the fallacy of guilt by association and has displayed an appalling lack of journalistic ethics.

Nick Kollerstrom is the only party here who has displayed a commitment to exposing falsehoods and revealing truths. His defense is very simple: the hypotheses on which the Holocaust narrative has been based are provably false and not even scientifically possible. I have written about this in my articlesThe War on Truth: Research on the Holocaust can end your career,”[9] ISIS trips, stumbles and falls,”[10] and discussed it during my presentation at the 2014 conference Academic Freedom: Are there limits to inquiry? JFK, 9/11 and the Holocaust,” at which Nick and I both spoke.[11]

But far better than reviewing them, read this brilliant study by the world’s leading iconoclast, Nick Kollerstrom, my dear friend, whom I admire beyond words as a splendid example of what historians should be doing in their professional work by getting history straight—lest Voltaire’s admonition continue to apply—including about the atrocities of World War II. There were real atrocities committed by all sides, just not the ones about which we have been told.

References

[1] “Interview with Professor Robert Faurisson at the Guest House of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” www.robertfaurisson.blogspot.com, December 13, 2006.

[2] Ibid., February 3, 2012.

[3] See Nick’s online papers at www.codoh.com/library/authors/1580/

[4] Imre Lakatos, Alan Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1970.

[5] Sir Karl Popper systematically investigated the diverse methods of immunizing theories in his The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Hutchinson & Co., London 1968, pp. 82-97.

[6] Jan Markiewicz, Wojciech Gubala, Jerzy ?ab?d?, “A Study of the Cyanide Compounds Content in the Walls of the Gas Chambers in the Former Auschwitz and Birkenau Concentration Camps,” Z Zagadnien Nauk Sadowych, Vol. XXX (1994) pp. 17-27 (www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-research/post-leuchter.report).

[7] They quoted but ignored a book which had exposed their fallacious approach (Ernst Gauss, Vorlesungen über Zeitgeschichte, Grabert, Tübingen 1993; Engl.: G. Rudolf, Lectures on the Holocaust, 2nd ed., The Barnes Review, Washington, DC, 2010).

[8] See Germar Rudolf, “Polish Pseudo-Scientists,” in: G. Rudolf, Carlo Mattogno, Auschwitz-Lies, 2nd ed., The Barnes Review, Washington, DC, 2011, pp. 45-67.

[9] Veterans Today, February 4, 2012; www.veteranstoday.com.

[10] On my blog at www.jamesfetzer.blogspot.com, June 13, 2011.

[11] April 26, 2014; for details see www.veteranstoday.com/2014/06/05/

——

James-H.-Fetzer

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, has published widely on the theoretical foundations of scientific knowledge, computer science, artificial intelligence, cognitive science, and evolution and mentality. McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, he has also conducted extensive research into the assassination of JFK, the events of 9/11, and the plane crash that killed US Sen. Paul Wellstone. The founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, his latest books include The Evolution of Intelligence (2005), The 9/11 Conspiracy (2007), Render Unto Darwin (2007), and The Place of Probability in Science (2010).

 

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=332859

 

Exclusive Interview with Hockey Coach and Truth-Revealer Christopher Sandau by RadicalPress.com

NewChrisLHdr

Exclusive Interview with Hockey Coach and Truth-Revealer Christopher Sandau

by

RadicalPress.com 

ATEditorRP300 copy

[Editor’s Note: The recent media frenzy over former North Delta hockey coach Christopher Sandau’s Facebook page has proven once again that freedom of expression here in Canada is definitely under heavy attack by the Zionist controlled news outlets. I was able to contact Chris Sandau yesterday and do an interview with him on his reaction to all of the hullabaloo surrounding his efforts to bring the truth about Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist party of Germany to the attention of his Facebook friends and viewers.]

INTERVIEW WITH CHRISTOPHER SANDAU

CHRIS SANDAU

RadicalPress.com: Well Chris it looks like the proverbial shit has hit the fan now that the Zionist-Jew controlled media here in Canada was tipped off about your Facebook page. At first glance and from the few examples shown in the Zionist news media the subject matter that you had posted on your page is hardly unusual for Facebook. There are numerous FB pages and groups where dozens, if not hundreds of FB members, have exactly the same material and in many cases a whole lot more information on the real history of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party from the period of German history that began in 1933 with the democratic election of Hitler and the NSPD  and ended abruptly in 1945. Do you think that your page suddenly caught the attention of Zionist media and that you in particular were singled out for attack simply because of the fact that you were a hockey coach and working with kids ages 11-14?

Chris S: Hey Arthur, I do feel that also the timing of this event may have spiked the Zionist media’s interest in my particular story as it has happened so close to Remembrance Day. And yes, me being a hockey coach for kids was indeed a big reason for them to again bring as much negative attention as possible so that they can ensure nobody will ever try put out such information again when holding what can be deemed as an influential position in society.

RadicalPress.com: It’s fairly evident from the knowledge that you had posted on your home page that you have taken the time to look deeper into the status quo history that Canadians have been programmed all their lives to believe as the real history of Germany during the period of the second world war. Can you tell readers how it was that you came to escape all the early school and media brainwashing that Canadians are subjected to and realized that history as we know it was in fact extremely one sided, favouring the victors in the war rather than looking at real causes and the real history of National Socialist Germany.

Chris S: I’d say my awakening more or less started about 6 months after 9/11 thanks to a friend who put me onto a few websites including Alex Jones, Henry Makow, and David Icke and that got me looking at the world differently. As for the history of WW1 & WW2, for as long as I can remember first hearing of those events I had always a keen curiosity and always found the official story to be somewhat untrue, I just never knew where to find possible truthful information. Nor did I have much time as I was caught up in chasing the professional hockey playing dream. Really just in the past few years I started coming across information from the likes of Dr. Fredrick Toben, Germar Rudolf, David Irving, Professor Robert Faurisson, Fred Leuchter, Ernst Zundel, David Cole, Dennis Wise, the list goes on. After finding such information I realized that these truthers held more weight due to the fact they are touching subjects that most other truthers are too scared to touch and I’m at the moment discovering why.

RadicalPress.com: Are you of German ancestry Chris and if so could you provide readers with a bit of background on what your personal connections are with Germany.

Chris S: Yes Arthur, my father’s parents are German as well as my mother’s mother. My mother herself is born in England and her father was in the Royal Airforce. As for my father’s father, he was actually born in a German village called Katzbach in what is today in the Ukraine. My father’s mother came from Alsace Lorraine which also at the time was apart of Germany. Both grandparents came to Canada before WW1. As for my mother’s mother she was an aspiring pianist and actually moved from Munich to London in 1939 where she would soon meet her husband. In 1940 my mother was born and in 1942 my grandfather flew them to Canada where they would settle. However shortly after, my grandfather had to fly back to England to rejoin the RAF and soon after returning wouldn’t be heard from again. My grandmother’s brother Maximilian, whom I was given my middle name after, served in the German military till the summer of 1941. He positioned himself in the military as a messenger and was sent to Belgium on a mission where he would eventually get on a ship to the United States. The details of why and how he did this are shady as he never liked to speak about the war time with my parents. Interestingly enough he was a linguist and could speak German, French, Italian, and English with an American accent from the midwestern states. I can only speculate why he went to the United States, but nevertheless, as soon as the war ended he quickly returned to Germany where he would live out the rest of his life in the suburbs of Munich. Aside from Great Uncle Max there were several other relatives that served in the German military but unfortunately did not survive.

As for myself I played several hockey seasons in Germany and after spending 4 years over there my curiosity only grew as to what really happened between WW1 until the end of WW2. I was especially fortunate for some documents I received from my Great Uncle Maximilian during my 4th hockey season over there. One of the documents from Max I was given was the paper that showed where he is buried. The crazy thing was in my 2nd hockey season in Germany I lived across the street from the Westfriedhof Cemetary in Munich and the whole time I lived there I had absolutely no idea that that was where my Great Uncle Maximilian was buried. So it was a major coincidence and naturally I went back to this cemetary to finally pay my respects.

RadicalPress.com: I note in the CTV Vancouver story that they included the token “holocaust survivor” who, par for the course, has to tell the world (again and again) about all the “horrors” of the “concentration” camps (actually work camps) where they once again draw their “ace” propaganda card out of their sleeve and continue to spread the greatest lie of the 20th century, i.e. that “6 Million” Jews were gassed and then fried in ovens in places like Auschwitz. Given what you have learned about the true history of the period and the fact that the only verifiable record of deaths in the work camps was by the International Red Cross who stated that the number was well below half a million and the causes were from Typhus and starvation how do you perceive these ongoing propaganda lies about there having been “6 Million Jews” intentionally murdered?

Chris S: This amazing claim that 6 million Jews were intentionally murdered is quite astounding. According to the Jewish Almanac, the Jewish population actually increased during the period of WW2. My feeling at this point is that there was no such plan to exterminate the Jewish people. If there was such a plan, why would the Germans go to the trouble of shaving everyone’s head before sending them into the alleged gas chambers? Next why would hundreds of people standing outside the alleged chambers put up zero resistance when they could hear people screaming inside the chambers before eventually succumbing to the deadly gas, especially when the inmates outnumbered the guards by 100 to 1 according to the 7 or 8 Jewish witnesses that seemed to always appear at every holocaust revisionist trial? Also why is it always the same 7 or 8 Jewish witnesses that testify at all the revisionist trials? Of the thousands of so called holocaust survivors, why don’t any of the other survivors ever testify? Some of these camps didn’t even have enough German staff on hand to man the camps so they had to hire Jewish people to work as staff members in the camps. For some reason mainstream historians leave out the fact there were Typhus epidemics in the camps due to lice infestations and the German staff was doing all they could to prevent the typhus from killing everyone in the camps. Not to mention towards the end of the war there were terrible food shortages that made it difficult to feed all the inmates. Many civilians were suffering from the food shortages as well. Also when you visit the so called concentration camps today you see absolutey no staining on the walls left from the gas anywhere in those shower rooms. Yet when you take a peak inside the very small fumigation chambers there’s traces of the Zyklon B gas everywhere. These fumigation chambers were used to delouse all the inmates clothing, bed sheets, blankets, etc as they needed to kill all the lice. The crematories were built so that they could cremate bodies that had been infected with Typhus. As they found when they buried these infected bodies in the ground, the disease would leech through the soil and into the local water supply which in turn made many of the folks living nearby sick. There is really so much that needs to be continuously asked as the official story just doesn’t seem to add up.

RadicalPress.com: I suppose it’s fair to ask Chris whether you were truly taken by surprise when all this negative publicity suddenly came about? We often see individual’s pages on Facebook being taken down by those who run it (the Jews) because they don’t approve of something and it’s inevitably something that paints them in a negative, albeit truthful light. Did you, up until it all exploded in your face, ever think that it would actually happen to you?

Chris S: To be honest I was aware I could lose my job but sometimes there are more important things in life than teaching people how to shoot a little black rubber disc into a 6×4 sized net. However, I did not foresee getting all of this media attention as I didn’t expect anyone to contact any media over this. It just shows how low some people will go when they don’t like who you really are. They clearly would much rather you just fall in line like everyone else and go through life believing in the lies just as they do.

RadicalPress.com: When the North Delta Minor Hockey Association gave you an ultimatum to either remove or hide your Facebook page you, courageously stood your ground and refused to bow down to their pressure. Can you tell readers why you decided to stand up for what you believed in rather than surrender your principles for the sake of keeping your job?

Chris S: Again, as I said earlier, sometimes there are more important moments in life than worrying about Hockey even if its my job or not. Standing up for what I believe in is far more important. I’d rather be hated for who I am than loved for something I am not.

RadicalPress.com: Up until this incident took place Chris did you realize just how brainwashed the general public is when it comes to understanding the real history of National Socialist Germany? Were you in any way prepared for the media frenzy that ensued after a parent laid a complaint against you?

Chris S:  Indeed I was aware of the brainwashing but I was hoping that people that know the type of person I am, would look further into the information I was presenting. Especially, when the folks that know me, know that I am the complete opposite of a violent person. I was actually taken by surprise when I first recieved a call from the Surrey Now Newspaper to do an interview.

RadicalPress.com: Those who have studied the real history of Adolf Hitler and the era of National Socialism know with a high degree of certainty just how false the history is that appears in the Zionist media, be it their newspapers or tv or Hollywood or the endless tabloids and magazines that constantly keep harping on about the “Nazis” and how terrible Adolf Hitler was. I even read in the  Surrey Now a quote from an unidentified parent where they said: “You can’t be a Nazi and coach kids hockey.” Can you tell readers why you choose to not use that term when speaking of National Socialists and why you find it personally offensive?

Chris S: The word Nazi is truly a derogatory word. It is like using the K word to describe a Jewish person or the N word to describe a black man, etc. The word Nazi is attached only to a completely negative meaning being that it defines you as evil and that you want to harm people of other races and religions and that you want to rule the world. The goal of National Socialists was to promote the love of one’s race and heritage meanwhile respecting all other races. There was never such a goal in place to exterminate other races and dominate the world. It’s funny how all of the evil talk has been placed on the National Socialists. If you take a step back and look at whats going on today, you will see it is the Zionist controlled USA that is slowly occupying one country after the next. I think I heard someone say the other day that WW2 was the war to end all wars, yet the USA hasn’t stop fighting wars since. Not to mention Israel hasn’t stopped killing the Palestinians since. 

RadicalPress.com: Thank you Chris for taking the time to speak with RadicalPress.com. Your courage and willingness to stand up for the principles you believe in are most laudable and a good example to the younger generations of Canadians who no doubt are also finding out the real truth about Hitler and NS Germany thanks to the efforts of people such as yourself.

~END~

* A special thanks to Trevor LaBonte for his part in connecting RadicalPress.com up with Chris Sandau.

 

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

TrevorLaBonteHistoryHdr

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

By

Trevor LaBonte

July 28, 2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—–

The Israeli Genocide Of Gaza Continues: I Was Wondering When These Psychotic Criminals Would Play Their Holocaust Card, And Here We Go!

Screen Shot 2014-07-28 at 10.15.21 PM

MONDAY, JULY 28, 2014

The Israeli Genocide Of Gaza Continues: I Was Wondering When These Psychotic Criminals Would Play Their Holocaust Card, And Here We Go!

The slaughter of the innocent people of Gaza continues… Right now, the criminally psychotic state of Israel has turned their armies towards the center of Gaza itself and especially Gaza City itself.  Over the next few days I can guarantee that the death toll from these mass murdering thugs as they continue to shoot and maim Palestinians without any just cause will escalate.  What we are indeed witnessing it the criminal Israeli “final solution” to the Palestinian “problem” which will be the extermination of every single one of them.  It is cold blooded murder and much of the world remains blinded to the truth of this slaughter thanks to the criminal Jewish control of the media and our governments.

With the psychotic Israelis no longer able to use the “murder” of those three Israeli youths last month as their excuse for the extermination of the Palestinians in Gaza, I was wondering when these psychos would try to play their ultimate “trump card” by trying to insanely equate this slaughter to their still unproven and unresearchable “Holocaust” of World War II.   Well it seems we need not wait any longer, for according to this newest article from the Jerusalem Post online news service at www.jpost.com, these psychos are claiming that the ongoing protests across Europe and America against their evil actions in Gaza could lead to a rapid rise in “antisemitism” and even a new “holocaust”.   The article itself is entitled: “We Are Looking At The Beginning Of A New Holocaust” and I have it right here for everyone to view in disgust for themselves.  I do have my usual thoughts and comments to follow:

Screen Shot 2014-07-28 at 10.22.53 PM

The situation facing European Jewry is “simply intolerable, unacceptable and inexcusable,” Israeli Jewish Congress president Vladimir Sloutsker told MKs and foreign diplomats at a special session of the Knesset Immigration, Absorption and Diaspora Committee on Monday.

Calling the rise in anti-Semitic incidents accompanying Israel’s invasion of Gaza an “SOS situation,” Sloutsker warned that if left unchecked, such behavior could lead to another European genocide.

“Never before since the Holocaust, have we seen such a situation as today,” he said, referring to the continent-wide demonstrations by pro-Palestinian activists, a number of which have generated into violence and many of which have featured racist rhetoric.

“We are potentially looking at the beginning of another Holocaust now. These events [violent demonstrations and expressions of anti-Semitism] will only grow in scale across Europe,” he asserted.

Addressing the legislators and representatives of a number of European governments, including those of Denmark, Holland and France, the oligarch and former head of the Russian Jewish Congress called for Jewish communities across the continent to “unite and consolidate.”

Sloutsker also called on all European governments to impose what he called “strict regulations” on the format and content of demonstrations in order to prevent further violence against Jews.

Citing a recent proposal by Belgian Jewry to establish a position of Special European Commissioner to monitor and combat anti-Semitism and racism, Sloutsker said such measures would “help send a strong message that European leadership is united and committed to combating anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia.”

A number of Israeli legislators echoed Sloutsker’s call for a more proactive European approach to combating anti-Semitism.

“Fight together with us,” MK Shimon Ohayon urged the diplomats present, adding that he was opposed to “dangerous propaganda” that painted Israel as an aggressor.

Jews in Europe have been targeted because they are Jewish and not because of any territorial claim or conflict in the Middle East, the lawmaker asserted, but “because they are against them because they are Jews,” citing attacks against Jews in France, including a recent riot in the Parisian suburb of Sarcelles in which the synagogue and Jewish stores were targeted by people.

“We ask you to stop this wheel” of “anti-Semitic hatred in Europe,” he added, calling anti-Zionism the “new anti-Semitism.”

The world “must understand” that Israel is fighting against terrorism, committee chairman Yoel Rzbozov said in response to Ohayon’s statement, echoing the prevailing sentiment among the lawmakers present.

The state will not allow one Jew to remain undefended, MK Yisrael Hasson chimed in, asserting that the fates of European and Israeli Jews are intertwined.

Jews is Belgium are being asked “why are you killing children in Gaza?” Rafael Werner, a representative of Belgium’s Jewish community recounted, asserting that there is little distinction being made between Jews and Israelis.

“There is no hasbara in Europe,” he complained, using the Hebrew term for public diplomacy.

The situation in Europe is “dire,” said MP Meir Habib, a Jew who represents French expatriates in the National Assembly. While praising the French political leadership for their commitment to defending their country’s Jewish community, he said that hearing calls for the deaths of Jews at demonstrations left him “concerned that there will be a second Toulouse,” a reference to the 2012 shooting deaths of several Jews at a Jewish school in that city.

Decrying what he perceived as a lack of concern for the mass deaths accompanying the Syrian civil war, Habib complained that accusations of “disproportionate” actions by Israeli forces have been harmful and asserted that the media is “the primary problem.”

Most French Jews will remain in France despite a high rate of emigration, he concluded, imploring his Israeli counterparts to “help those who stay.”

European representatives present during the meeting sought to assure the room that their governments are committed to defending local communities.

“We refuse to allow any conflict to be imported into French society,” a representative of the French embassy said. “The security of the Jewish citizens of France is an utmost priority for us. Our determination will not falter.”

“Forceful measures have to be taken against cases of anti-Semitism or it will increase,” Dutch Ambassador Casper Veldkamp said. “The situation is severe. We risk importing the conflict from the Middle East to Europe when Europe should export respect.”

Danish Ambassador Jesper Vahr agreed but cautioned the communal leaders and legislators about linking anti-Semitism and the current Israeli military operation.

“We are discussing anti-Semitism. There is also another discussion going around the table pertaining Operation Protective Edge,” he said. “I would warn against mixing apples and oranges…we as a society also defend the right of people in Denmark to voice their protests against the actions happening on the ground. You know the position of my government on that.”

However, he added, Denmark supports Israel’s “right to defend itself” and will “exert all efforts to fight the scourge of anti-Semitism.”
———–

NTS Notes:  Again, because I do live in Jew occupied Canada and we have our own outrageous “hate crime” laws that muzzle any research into the validity of the “holocaust”, I cannot comment about that period of history… I ask everyone to do their own research and to draw their own conclusions…..

What we have here is a vain attempt by these psychos to get their slaves in the European Union to squash any protests and dissent against their actions in Gaza…. The problem is that people are not stupid, and can clearly see that these psychos are indeed out to slaughter and exterminate an entire people, and these people are rising up against Jewry and protesting in the streets of Europe and everywhere around the world…

I do have a suggestion for these monsters… If they do not like the fact that people are protesting and waking the hell up to their evil actions then how about stopping your aggression and genocide against the Palestinians… And  how about giving up your evil ways and actually try to live with the rest of mankind?

I knew it was only going to be a matter of time before these monsters tried their fraud “holocaust card” to try to end protests against their evil actions… The problem is that by now everyone is no longer fooled by this “holocaust” rhetoric.   The Jews have tried to play that card so many times in the past that people are sick of their lies and deceit.  Therefore the screams of “holocaust” are now falling on deaf ears…

The world is indeed waking up to the danger of these monsters and what they are doing in Gaza. Their constant whining, always trying to play the “victim”, and cries of “Holocaust” are definitely no longer working..

More to come

NTS

SOURCE: http://northerntruthseeker.blogspot.ca/2014/07/the-israeli-genocide-of-gaza-continues_28.html

 

A Tribute to Jim Keegstra – Canadian Patriot and Truth Teller by Arthur Topham

A Tribute to Jim Keegstra – Canadian Patriot and Truth Teller
 
by
Arthur Topham
 
June 16th, 2014
 
Jim Keegsra
March 30, 1934 – June 2, 2014
 
    Rest in Peace
 
No, I never knew Jim Keegstra personally nor did I have any verbal or written communications with him during his lifetime. Nor did I personally know Ernst Zundel or have any contact with him either. But regardless of that we still share a common bond that unites us in the spirit of Truth and Justice and that connection is permanently and indelibly burnt into our souls and no amount of brainwashing propaganda and calumny and hate-filled screeds from the Jew media will ever alter the fact. 
 
We all have stood up to and faced the enemy and revealed him for who and what he was and is – the consummate epitome of lies and eternal infamy and the historic instrument of endless destruction, war, torture, rape, murder, bestial abominations, terror and fear. And for those reasons we have been attacked and vilified and called every conceivable epithet known to man and Jew.
 
One other thing that I and Jim and Ernst (and many other victims of the Jewish criminal cartel) share in common is that we all were blessed to have been the fortunate beneficiaries of the spiritual and legal largesse of the world’s foremost counsel and freedom of speech fighter, the late and great Mr. Douglas Christie, who, up until his untimely demise in March of 2013, worked tirelessly to prevent the courts of Canada from being overrun by the Jews with their insidious conniving and legal scheming designed to twist and pervert Canadian jurisprudence into a deviant variant of the former Soviet Communist Bolshevik “Show Trial” courts wherein “Hate Propaganda” (please read this as any negative criticism of the Jews or their diabolical agenda against the rest of the humanity embodied in their politically psychopathic doctrine know as “Zionism”) has superseded Truth and Fact and sound Common Sense.
 
 
D.Christie BattlingBarrister
 
It’s a fact of life in 2014 just as it was a fact of life back in 1914 that the vast majority of the media (what many today call the “mainstream media”) is, in reality, a Jew monopoly Media and they own it lock, stock and barrel with the exception of (Praise God!) the Internet. For this reason and this reason alone no individual will ever be allowed the freedom to criticize a Jew or their crimes in any fashion without incurring the rage and hatred and lies which their media outlets will call upon en masse in order to prevent “the people” from knowing what really is going on behind their digital curtain of deception.
 
Jim Keegstra was a Christian and a school teacher and a man of integrity dedicated to teaching truth and that is what he did when it came to revealing to his students what is undoubtedly the greatest lie of the 20th century and, in all likelihood, of recorded history itself – the infamous LIE of the “6 Million Holocaust” – a deluded and macabre fantasy of the Judaic priesthood which humanity has been unwittingly forced to endure since 1945; a falsehood the Jews concocted in order to threaten, brow-beat, intimidate, cajole and bewitch the world into believing via their media cartel in order to buttress unchallenged support for their surreptitious designs for global hegemony.
 
 
HoloTorture copy
 
For that one reason and that reason alone the full weight of the Jew media and the state came down upon Jim Keegstra just as it did for Ernst Zundel when he attempted to educate Canadians about the very same LIE. 
 
A Google search of Jim Keegstra quickly reveals a gaggle of Jew media outlets that all lead off their stories with the catch-phrase “Jim Keegstra, Holocaust denier”. Over and over and over ad nauseum these disseminators of deception predictably punctuate, perpetuate and puke up their obscene, immoral “holocaust” perjury bile in voluminous amounts in order to keep brainwashed Canadians believing their gargantuan “6 Million” LIE; one that American writer Arthur R. Butz permanently demolished back in 1976 in his classic book The Hoax of the Twentieth Century.
KeegstraGoogle1KeegstraGoogle2PM
Like voyeuristic opportunists the Jew media waits with lurid impatience for any opportunity to exploit their former victims in order to shore up the faltering foundations supporting their infrastructure of tyranny, better known to the world today as the New World Order. The “holocaust LIE” is the cornerstone of their temple of terrorism, deception and destruction and any chance they get to exploit it will create a media feast.
 
Jim Keegstra is now dead and his spirit is with all the other Truth seekers who, in the past, have stood up to and exposed the unconscionable atrocities that have been foisted upon humanity by this cult of evil Satanic vipers.  No less a Truth teller than Jesus Christ himself once said, “I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan.”
 
At the present moment I am the only remaining Canadian who is now before the Canadian courts charged with a sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” crime against the Jews and facing a lengthy and costly trial in the B.C. Supreme Court. The section I was charged under was created and inserted into the Canadian law books by so-called “Canadian” Jews in order to stop people like Jim Keegstra, Ernst Zundel, John Ross Taylor, Malcolm Ross, myself and many others from challenging their outlandish and glaringly heinous legacy of lies that has turned the world into a living hell. 
 
I’ll conclude this short tribute with a few lines from a friend of Jim Keegstra’s who send them to me via email. They basically convey the sentiments that I’ve been trying to cover in this short essay.
 
“Kanadian patriot and school teacher Jim Keegsta was prosecuted in 1983 under Kanada’s then existing Hate statute for claiming the so-called “Holocaust” was “Exaggerated”. He subsequently became the first nationally vilified martyr for Kanadian freedom of speech in Kanada. That claim was subsequently substantiated when the world Jewish Congress in conjunction with the Auschwitz State Museum in Poland lowered the number of gassing victims at Auschwitz from 4 million to 1 million in 1990. So for any apologist who says the numbers don’t matter, it did to patriot Jim Keegstra who lost his job as a teacher and mayor of the town he lived in and was continuously vilified and slandered by the national media ever since. As a result, he was defunctionalized socially, politically and economically. Like heretics in the middle ages who denied that the earth was the center of the universe, you don’t deny the state religion of the west and get away with it. The only difference between then and now is that they’ve found a more civilized way of burning people at the stake.
 
There were other Kanadian martyrs before Jim, people like my good friend and mentor John Ross Taylor from Toronto who spent a year in jail in the late 1970s for a telephone message talking about the Jews and their machinations, but Jim Keegstra was the first to really go national in a big way. I guess THEY figured at the time that Kanadians had been dumbed down enough that it didn’t really matter what kind of outrage was perpetrated against traditional freedoms, notwithstanding that those freedoms went all the way back to the Magna Carta, and they were right. In fact the Keegstra case was the first one to my knowledge where a Kanadian judge in his final address to the jury stated, “The truth is not an issue in this case”. If the truth is not an issue in a court of Law, then what the hell is? I still haven’t figured that one out and obviously Jim Keegstra hadn’t either.
 
The RCMP even stationed armed snipers on the roof of the Red Deer, Alberta, court house when Jim was being tried. Kanada it seems must be protected against heretics at all cost.
 
Jim Keegstra was a friend and patriot who went out like a man. He will be sadly missed.”  T.L.
—–
  
 

Holocaust Con Is On Again by Brother Nathanael

http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=922

realzionistnews4a

Holocaust Con Is On Again

holoconag

AS EASTER APPROACHES, when Christians reflect on the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Holocaust Hoax will be in our faces once again.

 agholocon

“Holocaust Remembrance Week,” (carefully arranged in the very same month Christians honor Christ’s resurrection), will be replete with tax-payer funded programs focusing on Jewish ’suffering’ and delusions of Jewish martyrdom.

Jews in Brooks Brothers suits and Calvin Klein dresses will shove down our throats their ‘Holocaust suffering’ that trumps the validated sufferings of tens of millions of Gentiles.

The Holocaust cash cow is also a primary kosher weapon used to blaspheme and denigrate the Crucifixion of Christ by Jewry obnoxiously setting themselves up as God.

Who better to dish out this kosherized version of martyrdom than the self-anointed High Priest of Holocaustology, Elie Wiesel?

 wiesellfraudd 

Wiesel’s notoriety is due to his problematic ‘autobiography,’ “Night,” which should be classified as fiction due to his cunning use of invented material.

He describes in “Night” the death of a young boy he claims to have seen hanged.

He writes that he heard someone behind him say, “Where is God now?” ‘And I heard a voice within me answer him:’ “Where is He? He is hanging here on this gallows.”

In this passage, Wiesel blatantly equates Jews with Almighty God by claiming that God in the form of a Jewish victim of ‘nazis’ was ‘crucified.’

Here again he deifies Jews with his Talmudic blasphemy:

“Never shall I forget those moments which murdered ‘my God’ (the Jewish boy) and turned my dreams to dust.”

Wiesel’s agenda here is not difficult to understand. The Jews desperately want all non-Jews to worship them as God on earth.

zonehate 

They want us to believe that only their ’suffering’ is unique — that it offers ‘redemption’ by making the world a ‘better place’ by reminding us of our supposed collective guilt that must be ‘atoned’ for.

We are saved by feelings of guilt over the poor mistreated Jews. “Never again!” die Juden wail as they continue to dictate their agenda in the Press, in the Oval Office, and on Capitol Hill.

Wiesel reminds us that “Every Jew somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate – healthy, virile hate for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German. To do otherwise would be a betrayal of the dead.”

With Wiesel leading their “hate campaign,” Jewry claims to be God incarnate, Auschwitz becomes Calvary, and Jewish ’suffering’ supersedes all others, even of Christ Himself.

And with tax-payer-funded Holocaust Remembrance Week soon to be in our faces, the Goyim are forced to make their obligatory ‘atonement’ to the corpses of the Jewish dead.

 

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.

—-

 

Open Letter: To Tim Wilson, Human Rights Commissioner, Sydney, Australia from Fredrick Toben

TobenLetter Hdr

Dear Mr Wilson,

1. The last time I saw you was at the Senate Hearings into the RDA in Melbourne where you presented your passionate plea for sexual tolerance. Now as the new Human Rights Commissioner you stated on ABC TV, Lateline, Friday, 14th of March 2014, that I am motivated by hatred because I am a Holocaust questioner, you’re labeling me a “Holocaust denier” – see below for transcript of session and clip: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2014/s3963918.htm .

2. Please note that with my German background it is a normal reaction for me to question any accusation leveled against Germans whenever matters Holocaust arise, specifically when this horrendous unexamined accusation is made that Germans with clear intent systematically exterminated European Jews in homicidal gas chambers. See below the story: ‘The number is with me everywhere I go’. This current story is an example of another miraculous escape from the Auschwitz gas chambers, and I ask: When will the matter be tested for factual truth-content? After almost four decades Professor Robert Faurisson’s challenge still stands: ‘Show me or draw me the homicidal gas chamber – the murder weapon of Auschwitz?’  Then there are texts whose content remains unrefuted: Professor Arthur Butz’s classic, The Hoax of the 20th Century, Germar Rudolf’s The Rudolf Report, Carlo Mattogno, Thomas Kues, Jürgen Graf The “Extermination Camps” of “Aktion Reinhardt”, and many other books that in Germany, for example, are banned because they question the pillars on which the Holocaust narrative rests.

3. This act of inquiring into the factual claims, and whether they stand up to scrutiny, cannot be labelled an act of HATE, as you do. In fact, I consider the teaching of matters Holocaust as an act of expressed racial hatred against Germans. Years ago I attempted to bring an action of such nature before the Human Rights Commission but was almost laughed at by the registry staff. Kirsty Gowans at that time advised me that HREOC was a political animal.

4. Please view the following clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS73ufRIoYc  wherein at the beginning a questioner states that the Holocaust narrative remains unchallenged, which cannot be questioned and is taught in schools as ‘a quasi religious dogma’, and she elicits from a Holocaust believer the astounding response at 5.05: …the West incurred a debt towards the Jews from the Holocaust and the Palestinians paid for that, and I think that one of the great discoveries of the last few years from Palestinian solidarity is the understanding that  the West also has a debt to Palestinians and we ….

5. Then, let me briefly comment on the comment made by Jeremy Jones in the ABC TV program, Lateline: >>Since that time we’ve had a series of cases and when we look at the situation before the law came in, and since, you could say that the law has acted to do exactly what Tim is saying we need, which is providing the argument against those – the people who will otherwise not listen to reason, and I don’t agree that you can automatically say that it’s self-evident that somebody like a Holocaust denier is bad. It took the court case to go through to identify what was wrong with the argument and it was because of the judgment that this was seen to be something abhorrent.<<

5.1 When in 1996 Jones started legal action against me he refused to conciliate and opted directly for a formal hearing because Section 18C had been designed specifically to stifle debates on matters Holocaust and the legal model used was that from Germany where a specific Holocaust law stifles debate because any questioning results in “defaming the memory of the dead”. In most legal jurisdictions a defamation action ends with the aggrieved person’s death. Not so with the Jews.

5.2. Mr Jones also refused to conciliate with Mrs Olga Scully and Mr Anthony Grigor-Scott, the latter was the only one who won his appeal before the Federal Court. Both Mrs Scully and I were bankrupted on account of having court costs awarded against us. Jones’ aim was to place so-called “Holocaust denial” out of the reach of open debate. Both Mrs Scully and I insisted that the commissioners and the judges help us in finding the truth of the allegations made against Germans within the officially-sanctioned Holocaust narrative. Unfortunately, both commissioners and judges refused to state to us that truth is a defence against the allegation leveled against us. And they were certainly not interested in looking into the factuality of what we were presenting. In fact, one judge during my 2009 appeal threateningly stated to my counsel: ‘You are not suggesting the Holocaust didn’t happen!’ Counsel’s response was: ‘With respect, Your Honour, that is not how I ran the case’.

5.3 Thus at no time were matters of fact canvassed in court for truth-content, but only whether Section 18C was activated by the published material in question. Of course, any material can be judged to give rise to an offence – and questioning the factuality of the Holocaust narrative is offensive to those who fear open debate about this historical incident now labelled “Holocaust”. The almost two decades-long court case in which I was locked in with Jones never once looked at any arguments and what allegedly was abhorrent about them. The last time Holocaust matters of fact were canvassed in a court of law anywhere in the world was in 1988 during the Ernst Zündel Toronto Holocaust trial. Since that time Holocaust trials focused on matters of law – and operated under a watered-down defamation legal framework where there was in effect no defence available for an accused of, for example, spreading HATE.

6. Mr Wilson,  if you really value free expression, which you state is also in your personal interest, then be wary of those who split free expression into free speech and hate speech. After all, for the latter we have defamation laws where individuals can go to court if aggrieved about what someone has said or written about them. Then we test such “absurd”, “ridiculous” and “preposterous” statements for truth content and investigate the physical facts. The implied allegation you have made against me is that my expressing my views is because I have “hate in their [my] heart”; or would it be possible for you to entertain the thought that I am just telling the truth! After all, is it not a truism, which any student has to learn, that sometimes the truth hurts?

7. As I am being blocked by personnel within the Attorney-General’s office from personally discussing this matter with Senator Brandis, with whom I briefly exchanged words about a visit to his office during the Wagner Ring Gala Dinner in November 2013 at Melbourne, I would appreciate us having a discussion on this matter and then perhaps you can ascertain whether I am motivated by hate in my heart.

Kindest regards

Fredrick Toben
toben@toben.biz
===================================

Read further to view the articles mentioned in Toben’s Open Letter
[Read more…]

Robert Fourisson – A Most Honourable Man by Anthony Lawson

Screen Shot 2014-03-08 at 10.30.08 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abRiqpeQyY0&feature=em-subs_digest

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