IDF order will enable mass deportation from West Bank By Amira Hass

April 12, 2010 by

IDFpigs

IPF (Israeli Pig Force) assaulting Palestinian youth

__________________________________________________________

IDF order will enable mass deportation from West Bank

By Amira Hass
April 11, 2010

A new military order aimed at preventing infiltration will come into force this week, enabling the deportation of tens of thousands of Palestinians from the West Bank, or their indictment on charges carrying prison terms of up to seven years.

When the order comes into effect, tens of thousands of Palestinians will automatically become criminal offenders liable to be severely punished.

Given the security authorities’ actions over the past decade, the first Palestinians likely to be targeted under the new rules will be those whose ID cards bear home addresses in the Gaza Strip – people born in Gaza and their West Bank-born children – or those born in the West Bank or abroad who for various reasons lost their residency status. Also likely to be targeted are foreign-born spouses of Palestinians.

Until now, Israeli civil courts have occasionally prevented the expulsion of these three groups from the West Bank. The new order, however, puts them under the sole jurisdiction of Israeli military courts.

The new order defines anyone who enters the West Bank illegally as an infiltrator, as well as “a person who is present in the area and does not lawfully hold a permit.” The order takes the original 1969 definition of infiltrator to the extreme, as the term originally applied only to those illegally staying in Israel after having passed through countries then classified as enemy states – Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria.

The order’s language is both general and ambiguous, stipulating that the term infiltrator will also be applied to Palestinian residents of Jerusalem, citizens of countries with which Israel has friendly ties (such as the United States) and Israeli citizens, whether Arab or Jewish. All this depends on the judgment of Israel Defense Forces commanders in the field.

The Hamoked Center for the Defense of the Individual was the first Israeli human rights to issue warnings against the order, signed six months ago by then-commander of IDF forces in Judea and Samaria Area Gadi Shamni.

Two weeks ago, Hamoked director Dalia Kerstein sent GOC Central Command Avi Mizrahi a request to delay the order, given “the dramatic change it causes in relation to the human rights of a tremendous number of people.”

According to the provisions, “a person is presumed to be an infiltrator if he is present in the area without a document or permit which attest to his lawful presence in the area without reasonable justification.” Such documentation, it says, must be “issued by the commander of IDF forces in the Judea and Samaria area or someone acting on his behalf.”

The instructions, however, are unclear over whether the permits referred to are those currently in force, or also refer to new permits that military commanders might issue in the future. The provision are also unclear about the status of bearers of West Bank residency cards, and disregards the existence of the Palestinian Authority and the agreements Israel signed with it and the PLO.

The order stipulates that if a commander discovers that an infiltrator has recently entered a given area, he “may order his deportation before 72 hours elapse from the time he is served the written deportation order, provided the infiltrator is deported to the country or area from whence he infiltrated.”

The order also allows for criminal proceedings against suspected infiltrators that could produce sentences of up to seven years. Individuals able to prove that they entered the West Bank legally but without permission to remain there will also be tried, on charges carrying a maximum sentence of three years. (According to current Israeli law, illegal residents typically receive one-year sentences.)

The new provision also allow the IDF commander in the area to require that the infiltrator pay for the cost of his own detention, custody and expulsion, up to a total of NIS 7,500.

The fear that Palestinians with Gaza addresses will be the first to be targeted by this order is based on measures that Israel has taken in recent years to curtail their right to live, work, study or even visit the West Bank. These measures violated the Oslo Accords.

According to a decision by the West Bank commander that was not backed by military legislation, since 2007, Palestinians with Gaza addresses must request a permit to stay in the West Bank. Since 2000, they have been defined as illegal sojourners if they have Gaza addresses, as if they were citizens of a foreign state. Many of them have been deported to Gaza, including those born in the West Bank.

Currently, Palestinians need special permits to enter areas near the separation fence, even if their homes are there, and Palestinians have long been barred from the Jordan Valley without special authorization. Until 2009, East Jerusalemites needed permission to enter Area A, territory under full PA control.

Another group expected to be particularly harmed by the new rules are Palestinians who moved to the West Bank under family reunification provisions, which Israel stopped granting for several years.

In 2007, amid a number of Hamoked petitions and as a goodwill gesture to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, tens of thousands of people received Palestinian residency cards. The PA distributed the cards, but Israel had exclusive control over who could receive them. Thousands of Palestinians, however, remained classified as “illegal sojourners,” including many who are not citizens of any other country.

The new order is the latest step by the Israeli government in recent years to require permits that limit the freedom of movement and residency previously conferred by Palestinian ID cards. The new regulations are particularly sweeping, allowing for criminal measures and the mass expulsion of people from their homes.

The IDF Spokesman’s Office said in response, “The amendments to the order on preventing infiltration, signed by GOC Central Command, were issued as part of a series of manifests, orders and appointments in Judea and Samaria, in Hebrew and Arabic as required, and will be posted in the offices of the Civil Administration and military courts’ defense attorneys in Judea and Samaria. The IDF is ready to implement the order, which is not intended to apply to Israelis, but to illegal sojourners in Judea and Samaria.”

————-

Filed Under: 'state' of Israel, Arab Perspectives, Editor's Zone, Gaza, Israeli Terrorism, Middle East, Palestine, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Zionist Atrocities

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Is HST paying for Campbell’s Olympic Prestige?

April 11, 2010 by

Editor – RadicalPress.com:

RE: HST & Olympic spending
In regards to the HST Tax and the Olympics I believe the HST is for paying for the phony fancy image “prestige” of the Olympics where they spent 10 to 100 times more then they needed to which is destroying what little credibility and integrity the government may have.
Putting on a fancy show to the extreme for prestige is ridiculous as appearances are superficial and of very little value and spending other people’s money such as taxes is what I call criminal. If the  politicians and multimillionaires want to put on a show of prestige by way of fancy expensive looks (which is totally superficial and useless) they’re the ones that should pay for it not anyone else.
The benefits of sports, which includes the Olympics, is learning to work and play well together, i.e. “sociability”, exercise, increasing one’s abilities and having fun; how well you play the game is very important but winning is not as important. Main thing to remember is it is just a game.
To make hard working people pay for expensive looks that are of no benefit to them is totally wrong and unfair.
Jack Cutting

Parksville, B.C.

Jack Cutting jcutting@shaw.ca

Filed Under: B.C. Liberal Party, B.C. Politics, Editor's Zone, HST, Jack Cutting, Law & Justice, Letters to the Editor, Olympics

Polish Plane Crash: Accident or Katyn Massacre II? by Tom Mysiewicz

April 11, 2010 by

KatynMassacII

Polish Plane Crash:  Accident or Katyn Massacre II?

by Tom Mysiewicz
April 11, 2010

“Rabbis absent themselves from flight at last moment because they say they could not fly to say prayers on the Sabbath”

I’ve long supported normalization of relations between Poland and Russia.  Mainly because I see Poland being set up for a replay of 1939, with similar bad consequences for it.   The stationing of so-called defensive missiles in Poland being the first chapter.  The death-by-plane-crash of a big chunk of Poland’s government and intelligentsia–just as they were making history by dealing with Mr. Putin and Russia–is a setback for those (like me) who’d like to see Poland survive the next world war.

In the mid 1930s, Poland was encouraged with false and/or unfulfillable defense promises to goad Germany into starting the Second World War.  Roosevelt, Churchill and Samuel Untermeyer got their war and Poland quickly got overrun and divided by Germany and the USSR.  On the orders of Stalin and certain Jewish Communist officials, 20,000 Poles–the officers and nobility who were the cream of Poland’s elite–were treacherously murdered at Katyn Forest.  And the crime was blamed on the Germans, when the Allies knew full well their “ally” had done it.  I have no doubts the crime was approved at the highest levels in London and Washington (and New York) and this while Polish soldiers bravely gave their lives fighting for the “Allied” cause.

Actually, were it not for the bravery of some of the murdered Poles in stopping the Red Army as it attempted to sweep across Europe in the aftermath of the First World War, all of Europe would have been forcibly converted into a Judeo-Communist abbatoir.

Poland was not to be spared further treachery.  After Roosevelt’s sellout at Yalta, Poland was abandoned to communism and years of killing of Polish POWs and privation and occupation by the USSR it’s “reward”.

And now this.  What are we to make of it?  The official story is that the plane was an old clunker, the pilot ignored four orders not to land and to divert to Belarus, the plane clipped trees in the fog, there were two explosions, and everyone on board was killed.   So blown up, in fact, all of the dead fit into two Russian helicopters.

What we are not hearing in the media is that the rabbinic delegation absented itself from the plane at the last moment when it learned the flight was to take place on the Sabbath (!–see the complete story at the end of this article.)

From the latest Arutz Sheva:

2. OBSERVING SABBATH SAVED LIFE OF POLAND’S CHIEF RABBI
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu

“A Jewish delegation from Poland, including the American-born Chief Rabbi Michael Schudrich, was spared from certain death by refusing to violate the Sabbath to fly with President Lech Kaczynski.
The president, his wife, his military chief of staff and senior political leaders were killed on Saturday when the plane crashed en route to a Russian city.
The Jewish delegation was supposed to fly with the president, according to Warsaw Rabbi Meir Stembler. “The delegation canceled its participation after it was understood that that plane was to fly on the Sabbath,” he said.”

(This brings to mind the many Jews absent from the WTC towers on 9-11 because they went to hear a speech by Ariel Sharon, which was curiously canceled prior to the attacks.)

Can rabbis travel on the Sabbath to administer a blessing or say “kaddish” over the dead–which is what these non-flying rabbis were supposed to do?  I’m guessing the answer is “yes”.  And, as the Jewish religious press has graciously asked:  Why were so many Polish officials (dangerously) together on the same plane?

Commentator James Buchanan (link to article follows) makes some observations about fortuitous plane accidents, including one that killed the Polish prime minister (in exile) after he learned the real story of Katyn in 1943.  It’s not that hard to arrange a plane accident, as at least three former members of the Kennedy family–including Joe Kennedy, Jr. and John Kennedy, Jr.–could testify!

Buchanan points out that the Polish presidential plane had a complete overhaul in 2009 and the model of Tupelov that had been involved in accidents was sound and that the cited accidents took place in remote areas where maintenance was not so good.

http://www.rebelnews.org/opinion/europe/209068-was-polish-president-murdered-in-staged-plane-crash

He also indicates that the now-deceased Polish leader had drawn flak from the Jewish press for incorporating alleged “anti-Semitic” elements in his latest coalition government.

Now we have to wait for the analysis of the black boxes and the alleged accident under Mr. Putin’s direct supervision–the Russians have also offered visas to any Polish experts who want to come and inspect the evidence.  This could be the challenge of a lifetime.  Any hint of murder on the part of the Russians will turn the suspicious Poles permanently against them.  If the plane was brought down, it could turn out to have been done by elements of the “Russian” mafia and/or some outside country engaged in a covert war with the Russians.  To my thinking, it doesn’t make sense for Putin and Medvedev to have done it as they had apparently devoted considerable effort to wooing Poland and appeared to be having some success.

——————

Tom Mysiewicz can be contacted at: tgmy7@hotmail.com
——————-

Filed Under: 'state' of Israel, 911, anti-Semitism, Babylonian Talmud, Conspiracy, Editor's Zone, Jews Behind Bolshevik Revolution, Political Zionism

Doug Christie Takes Powerful Free Speech Message to the University of Ottawa

April 9, 2010 by

Doug Christie Takes Powerful Free Speech Message to the University of Ottawa

[Paul Fromm of the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) writes: Just 10 days after a rowdy mob of protesters, egged on by a university administration that admonished the controversial U.S. Ann Coulter against "inappropriate" or hateful speech, won the University of Ottawa, unaffectionately known as the U of Zero, a reputation for censorship, when Ottawa Police advised that the appearance be canceled rather than they preserve law and order and free speech, Canada's foremost free speech lawyer, Doug Christie made a successful appearance before a packed standing room only meeting of 150. The meeting was organized by a number of free speech supporters and partially funded by the Canadian Association for Free Expression. Afterward, the audience listened with rapt attention and engaged the Battling Barrister in a lively discussion.]


       DOUGLAS CHRISTIE – CANADA’S FREEDOM OF SPEECH LAWYER

___________________________________________________________________________

Notes for Doug Christie’s Speech
University of Ottawa, April 8, 2010

I’m here to talk about free speech. I’m not here to practice it.

Unlike Ann Coulter, I don’t need a warning from the provost. I am a Canadian, trained by law in the way of silence, sullen silence, and code language. I have been trained by the Supreme Court not to engage in hate speech, even though no one can define it in advance, so I can avoid it.

There are general taboo topics which I must avoid or tread lightly around, like race, religion, ethnic origin, sex, sexual orientation, mental or physical disability or mental status. Then there are peripheral taboo topics like multiculturalism, immigration, affirmative action programs and a host of other ill-defined topics.

I have been trained to remain very sensitive to the broad political implications of these topics lest I face a very expensive lesson from the Human Rights Tribunal.

What the Supreme Court taught me when I appeared in Taylor and Zundel and Keegstra was that free speech has its limits in “hate” which means “extreme dislike.” So presumably I must like all races, religions, ethnic origins, etc. equally or at least dislike them only moderately. Or at least pretend to, which is more Canadian. I cannot denounce any one as evil.

The Law Society, through its decision of Harvey Strosberg taught me that if I speak in public, “law students” may tape some but not all of my words, and the Chairman of the Discipline Committee can issue a statement to the media condemning me as “identifying with a lunatic fringe,” even in the very act where he decides not to give me the benefit of a hearing where I could answer the allegation with evidence where both sides could be heard.

I learned in McAleer and Malcolm Ross, both of which went to the Supreme Court of Canada, that expressing your religious beliefs on your own time, is no defence and placing the messages in the United States where it is legal, is no defence if you mention where you can get the message to someone in Canada.

I learned that our parliamentarians of all parties love free speech so much that they banned someone from the precincts of Parliament who wanted to rent the parliamentary press gallery, a place anyone can rent for a press conference.

What was the press conference about? That the Human Rights Tribunal had ruled in Zundel’s case that “Truth was no defence,” and the truth of the statement could not be proven by any evidence. I know because that someone was me, the only lawyer in Canadian history to be banned by all party agreement from the precincts of parliament. Because in Canada truth is no defence. Orwell was right about double speak. Randy White a so-called Reform MP said he did not want me in his work place. Orwell was right about a lot of things.

I have learned and been carefully taught to avoid the taboo topics, to measure every word lest a tape recorder in the audience be taken to the Human Rights Commission, the police, the Law Society, or someone likes to complain to the Human Rights Commission.

I have learned to talk about free speech but never practice it. Never say anything like Ann Coulter would say, coming from a free society. And being in a university setting is all the more reason to be very careful about how you choose your words. The left-wing political giants who run most universities are able to let loose the mob with a wink and the students know their success with many professors depends on how successfully they can entrap a political foe.

Universities are the most dangerous place to practice free speech. Even topics like abortion which you would not normally think involve a taboo topic can quickly be spun into forbidden territory and sexism can result in expulsion or criminal charges. The civility of universities is accorded to those who can mobilize the largest screaming mob. No one listens.

I have to even be careful how I speak about Freedom of Speech.

[Read more...]

Filed Under: Anti-Defamation League (ADL), anti-Semitism, ARA Terrorists, B'nai Brith, Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Canadian Identity/Sovereignty, Canadian Jewish Congress, Canadian Politics, Editor's Zone, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Thought, Human Rights/orgs, Internet Freedom, Jewish Lobby, Law & Justice, Mainstream Mindcontrol Media (M3), Marc Lemire, New World Order, Political Prisoners, Political Zionism, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

The Attacks on Pope Benedict – a Conspiracy of Man – or God? by Michael Hoffman

April 9, 2010 by

Pic&bioMHoffmanII
Thursday, April 08, 2010

The Attacks on Pope Benedict – a Conspiracy of Man – or God?

by Michael Hoffman

Over the centuries many sorts of masquers have bored deep into the bowels of the Roman Catholic Church. Some of these have even occupied the papal throne; others were content to be the power behind that throne.

King Henry VIII first received the theological justification for his divorce from Catherine of Aragon from the Neoplatonic brotherhood inside the Vatican; out of said fraternity would emerge Dr. John Dee, the Protestant magician who, using the Hermetic and Kabbalistic cunning of the Roman Catholic magician Marsilio Ficino, furnished William Cecil with the mind control keys and mass persuasion techniques that gained him the rule of England through a reanimated goddess Isis who is known to history as Queen Elizabeth I.

Very few believing Catholics ever glimpse this hidden reality, and when they are so privileged as to gain a fleeting vision of it, they run from it, so threatening is it to the papal Caesarism to which they kowtow like the pagan subjects of Kubla Khan. Jesus Christ did not come to institute slavish and cowering obedience to mere men, however elaborately costumed or adored. He came to save souls, which is the highest law, a law recognized by only a few churchmen, such as the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who defied Popes Paul VI and John Paul II for that very reason.

Behind the scenes of the competing Catholic and Protestant churches exists a golden thread, a rainbow bridge if you will, that unites initiates in both camps who, believing they possess godlike powers derived from the secret gnosis of the Corpus Hermeticum, are above the morality they publicly preach, beyond good and evil, and united in processing humankind toward a “higher” destiny without the knowledge or consent of those being processed. This is the age-old mandate of the pagan-occult imperium.

Shortly before the latest uproar over pederasty within the Roman Catholic Church, a Vatican exorcist announced that the devil was active in the Vatican, even at the highest levels. Prior to this not exactly  unexpected revelation, Pope Benedict XVI completed the third of his pilgrimages to the Synagogue, the latest, on Jan. 17, at Rome itself, where this papal Judas gave every encouragement to the assembled Pharisees.

Most recently he has appointed a member of the secret society of Opus Dei to head the powerful diocese of Los Angeles, California, after child-molestation enabler and obstructor of justice Cardinal Roger Mahony retires next year with his pension intact and full church honors accorded to this patron of pederasty.

Certain Catholic automatons have marched forth, decrying a purported “media conspiracy” of “gossip” against the pope. But are the troubles that have befallen this pope a conspiracy of man, or a curse of God?

How long do the vassals of Rome imagine that God will be mocked by popes who make common cause with the ideological and spiritual descendants of those who stoned, laid hands upon and conspired in the murder of His Divine Son?

Pope John Paul II, the modern champion of the Synagogue and the first pope in history to enter its precincts as a supplicant, spent the final years of his pontificate as a hunchback, drooling spittle onto his breast. Unless he repents and makes reparation, Pope Benedict XVI can no more escape the wrath of God than did his predecessor.

If Benedict is besieged now, it may be payback for his treason to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, notwithstanding his provisional revival of the old Latin Mass, which he has integrated into a neo-Catholic hybrid Church of Holocaustianity, whereby Auschwitz is rendered far more sacred than Calvary, a revolutionary betrayal made tolerable now that it is accompanied by Tridentine incense and Gregorian chant.

Those badly deceived persons who make common cause with this pontiff might wish to consider what fate may be in store if they do not switch their allegiance from Benedict to Jesus.

———–

Copyright ©2010 by RevisionistHistory.org

JudaismDiscoveredAd       BishopWilliamsonSupportAd
Hoffman is the author of seven books of history and literature, including Judaism Discovered. He edits Revisionist History, a newsletter published six times a year. The latest issue, on “The Money Power,” is available for purchase online.

Filed Under: Alternative Media, Anti-Defamation League (ADL), anti-Semitism, B'nai Brith, Babylonian Talmud, Bishop Williamson, Christianity, Editor's Zone, Elizabeth Dilling, Ernst Zundel, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Thought, Internet Freedom, Jesus Christ, Jewish Holocaust Industry, Jewish Lobby, Jewish Media Monopoly, Jews, Judaism Discovered, Michael Hoffman, Palestine, Political Zionism, Pope Benedict XVI, Pope John Paul II, Revisionism, RevisionistHistory.org, Roman Catholic Church, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Vatican

RadAd: YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH RADICALPRESS.COM?

April 8, 2010 by

JOHNWAYNEUGOTAPROB?

Filed Under: Arthur Topham/ Contributor, Editor's Zone, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Thought, Internet Freedom, Political Zionism

RCMP arrest challenged Quesnel man at gunpoint for playing with a space gun

April 8, 2010 by

http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_cariboo/quesnelobserver/news/89563377.html#comment-42385726
Quesnel Cariboo Observer
Innocent

RodneyMoffat
Rodney Moffat clutches the toy gun which caused RCMP officers to arrest him at gunpoint.Autumn MacDonald photo

By Autumn MacDonald – Quesnel Cariboo Observer

March 30, 2010

The father of a mentally challenged, 90-pound Quesnel man is enraged after RCMP arrested his son at gunpoint.

The apprehension occurred Monday afternoon after a neighbour claimed to have seen a man carrying a gun by the mobile home park near Correlieu Secondary.

Rodney Moffat, 49, was walking past the school, to a store to buy milk when police apprehended him.

“They, they threw me down,” Rodney sobbed as he spoke to the Observer.

“They handcuffed me. They yelled at me.”

Afterwards, Rodney was taken to hospital, where he was treated with tranquilizers. On Tuesday, he was icing his wrist and bruised ribs.

The ordeal began when Rodney was outside his home, playing with a neon orange and silver plastic toy space gun, which Rodney had tucked into the waist of his pants.

A neighbour mistook the gun and called RCMP. Before they arrived, Rodney had returned the toy gun to his house, then embarked on his journey for milk.

Rodney’s parents – Eva and Karl – cannot believe police arrested their son.

“Can’t they tell the difference?” Karl said, shaking his head.

Karl, a retired police officer of 31 years with the Windsor Police Department, moved his family to the Quesnel area 16 years ago.

“Rodney’s been here that entire time,” Karl said.

“He poses no threat. He’s 90 pounds!”

“I have no idea why they used such excessive force,” Eva added, taking a deep breath.

“We feel betrayed. They’re the ones who are suppose to protect him.”

RCMP issued a release stating police must take any report of open possession of a firearm seriously.

“This is even more of a concern when an incident involving a possible firearm occurs near a school,” the release states.

It goes on to say “once examined the toy gun appeared quite realistic tucked into the man’s pants.

“It is very difficult to tell the difference between a genuine hand gun and a toy replica.”

“I didn’t mean to…” Rodney starts, then stops, his whole body vibrates, he mashes a tissue under his thick glasses.

“I didn’t mean to cause any trouble, dad.”

—————-

Filed Under: Autumn MacDonald, Canadian "Just-Us" System, Canadian Politics, Editor's Zone, Law & Justice, Quesnel Cariboo Observer, Rodney Moffat

Israel’s 9/11 “To Do” Checklist

April 8, 2010 by

http://careandwashingofthebrain.blogspot.com/2010/04/israels-911-to-do-checklist.html

911Mossadchecklist
Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Israel’s 9/11 “To Do” Checklist

1. On 9/11/2001, set off the world’s biggest false-flag against our ally, friend, financial backer, weapons depot and all around gullible sucker, the USA using Arab patsies, MOSSAD agents, mercs, CIA cutouts, katsas running White House and Pentagon traitors and our world-wide system of sayanim…. Check.

2. Use the terror and tragedies of that day to turn the USA into a carbon-copy of Israel; a seething collection of violent, out of control blood-thirsty Muslim haters who take glee in killing Arabs (and Persians) we want butchered…Check.

3. Hide behind the USA’s GWOT to terrorize, incarcerate and kill more Palestinians so we can continue on with our decades long plan of stealing ALL of Palestine… Check.

4. Use our ‘katsas,’ strategically placed in the major MSM outlets we either own or control to further brainwash Americans into thinking Iraq was tied to 9/11, is a menace to the USA and trick those fools into invading that nation… Check.

5. Use MOSSAD agents to set off IED’s and car bombs in Iraq, that our MSM outlets will blame on Muslims tied to 9/11, to keep Americans seething with hatred for decades and keep their sons and daughters dying in Iraq for the Greater Glory of Zionism… Check.

6. Continue to use our katsas–running our MSM sayanim–to poison American minds into thinking that Iran is some sort of threat to the USA (and tied into 9/11) so they’ll attack that nation. Use some of the same lies and psyops that worked during the run up to the Iraq invasion… Check.

7. Use our strategically placed sayanim at all levels of the federal judiciary to confuse, delay and deny any attempts by 9/11 victims family members to seek truth and justice… Check.

8. Use our media outlets to confuse, distract and keep in constant terror Americans with stories about 9/11 fictions and a non-existent ‘al Qaeda,’ and clog up their minds with lurid tales of celebrity and sports figure sex stories and gossip so they won’t notice our agents like Bernie Madoff looting hundreds of billions of dollars from their retirement accounts and pension plans, while our sayanim in the Federal Reserve and select Wall Street bank loot trillions from America. (P.S. Make sure none of that toxic Mortgage Backed Security crap is sold to or in Israel!)…. Check.

9. Use some of that wealth stolen from Americans to bribe and corrupt their leaders so that anytime a Congress member or State Department official or their President uses the words Arab or Muslim or Islam or Iran, that they also mention 9/11…. Check.

10. Keep using disturbing images and planted stories about 9/11, created by our people at MOSSAD Studios in Herzliya to continue to confuse and warp American minds so Israel can keep sucking the lifeforce, blood, wealth and treasure from our American hosts until they collapse and lie on the ground, looking like a skeleton that’s been picked clean by vultures… Check and Double-Check!

Filed Under: 'state' of Israel, 911, B'nai Brith, Babylonian Talmud, Conspiracy, Editor's Zone, Harry Abrams, Israeli Terrorism, Jewish Banking Cartel, Jewish Holocaust Industry, Jewish Lobby, Jewish Media Monopoly, Mossad, New World Order, Palestine, Political Zionism, sayanim, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, U.S. 'War' on Terror, Zionist Atrocities

Commies block Bob Dylan gigs

April 7, 2010 by

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010/apr/04/china-blocks-bob-dylan-gigs

China blocks Bob Dylan gigs

Bob Dylan’s planned tour of east Asia called off after Chinese officials refuse him permission to play in Beijing and Shanghai

BobDylan
Bob Dylan performing in 2002. Photograph: Gary Hershorn/Reuters

Aged 68 and almost half a century past the zenith of his angry, protest-song youth, Bob Dylan must almost have forgotten what it was like to be deemed a threat to society. But it seems at least one place still sees him as a dangerous radical.

Dylan’s planned tour of east Asia later this month has been called off after Chinese officials refused permission for him to play in Beijing and Shanghai, his local promoters said. China’s ministry of culture, which vets planned concerts by overseas artists, appeared wary of Dylan’s past as an icon of the counterculture movement, said Jeffrey Wu, of the Taiwan-based promoters Brokers Brothers Herald.

Dylan fans denied the chance to see their hero might also blame Björk, who caused consternation among Chinese officials two years ago by shouting pro-Tibet slogans at a concert in Shanghai, Wu told Hong Kong’s South China Morning Post.

The verdict scuppers Dylan’s plans to play his first dates in mainland China. The singer, who plays around 100 concerts a year on his Never Ending Tour, had hoped to extend a multi-city Japanese leg with concerts in Beijing, Shanghai, Taiwan, South Korea and Hong Kong. All these would now be called off, Wu told the newspaper.

“With Beijing and China ruled out, it was not possible for him just to play concerts in Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan,” he said. “The chance to play in China was the main attraction for him. When that fell through everything else was called off.”

Wu said officials had become more cautious since Björk, the Icelandic singer, chanted “Tibet! Tibet!” after performing a song called Declare Independence in Shanghai in 2008. China has ruled Tibet since invading it in 1950 and views the Himalayan territory as an integral part of its national territory.

“What Björk did definitely made life very difficult for other performers. They are very wary of what will be said by performers on stage now,” Wu said.

Last year, Oasis were told they were “unsuitable” to play in Beijing and Shanghai as Noel Gallagher had appeared at a Tibet freedom concert 12 years earlier.

————-

Filed Under: Bob Dylan, Communist China, Editor's Zone, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Thought

RadAd: Planting the Seeds of Truth and Freedom

April 7, 2010 by

RadAdPlantingSeeds

Filed Under: Editor's Zone

RadicalPress Publisher Arthur Topham guest on RoadKill Radio Tuesday, April 6, 7:30 pm PST

April 6, 2010 by

RadLogo&Pic

RadicalPress Publisher Arthur Topham will be appearing as a guest on RoadKill Radio with host Kari Simpson tonight, April 6, 2010 at 7:30 PST.

RoadKillRadio
Tonight, Tuesday April 6, 2010 on RoadKill Radio!!Kari Simpson & Ron Gray open up the debate onFree Speech vs. Free EEK!
&
Enlightened Sovereignty vs. Endangered Sovereignty
&
Post H1N1

7:30 –8:15 pm:  ARTHUR TOPHAM, publisher of the Radical Press joins us to talk about his ongoing battle to exercise his (and mine and yours) right to Free Speech!  A battle that is costing Canadian tax-payers (us) millions of dollars!

8: 20 – 8:55 pm:  Then, one of our favourite healthcare advocates, DEE NICHOLSON will be here to talk about “post H1N1” and the flood of adverse reports that are still coming in daily on the Canadians for Health Freedom website.  Also, Is our Sovereignty “Enlightened” or “Endangered”?

8:55 – 9:30 pm:        Current happenings that will affect you and your family, including the “Day of Silence”, an event coming soon to a school near you!

Be Wise, Be Aware & Be Informed!!

It all happens tonight at 7:30 p.m.-9:30 p.m. Pacific. Listen live at www.roadkillradio.com or check out the archived show later.

CALL IN: On-air telephone: (604) 525-4167 or (604) 525-3974
WHERE: Listen live - http://www.roadkillradio.com
EMAIL THE SHOW LIVE: Roadkillradio@live.ca

Filed Under: Alternative Media, Anti-Defamation League (ADL), anti-Semitism, Arthur Topham/ Contributor, B'nai Brith, B.C. Politics, B.C. Supreme Court, Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Canadian Identity/Sovereignty, Canadian Jewish Congress, Canadian Politics, Editor's Zone, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Thought, Harry Abrams, Human Rights/orgs, Internet Freedom, Jewish Lobby, Marc Lemire, Political Prisoners, Political Zionism, Religion

Erosion of Freedom of Speech and Moral Support for those battling Canada’s censors. Letter to Senator Doug Finley from RadicalPress.com

April 6, 2010 by

SenatorFinley

                        Canadian Senator Doug Finley

_______________________________________________________________

April 6, 2010

From:
Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
The Radical Press
Cottonwood, British Columbia

Ph: 250-992-3479

To:
Honorable Doug Finley
Canadian Senator
House of Parliament
Ottawa, Ontario

Dear Hon. Doug Finley,

Warm spring greetings to you from central B.C.

I’m sure that by now your inbox is overflowing like the psalmist’s proverbial cup with congratulatory messages from around the country and most likely around the world as a result of your courageous and patriotic message on freedom of speech given to fellow senators on March 25, 2010.

Please allow me, as yet another proud Canadian who truly understands the value of our historic right to this most cherished of freedoms, to add to the bounteous expressions of praise and gratitude that you so well deserve.

It is always a welcome occurrence to hear someone in your position speak out for rights that so many of our fellow Canadians gave their lives for in order to ensure that future generations might benefit from their ultimate sacrifice. And to have those concerns embellished with the thoughts of great persons throughout history who were able to phrase such cogent sentiments – people like Benjamin Franklin, Voltaire, Orwell and the great Milton not to mention our own exemplars, Liberal Prime Minister Wilfred Laurier and Joseph Howe – only added an additional depth of perspicacity to what I felt was a most prescient and important speech.

I would also like to thank you for speaking out on the deplorable situation that arose here in Canada as a result of the scheduled visit to our country by the American political commentator Ann Coulter. That example, among many other recent cases, certainly brought to the forefront the dangerous trend we’ve seen occurring in our nation with respect to this present danger to our fundamental right to freedom of speech.

As you rightfully stated in regard to this incident, “Too many Canadians, especially those in positions of authority, have replaced the real human right of freedom of speech with a counterfeit human right not to be offended.” Those were true words indeed and most applicable to our times.

As well, your remarks with respect to offensive opinions versus deliberate acts wherein someone counsels violence are extremely relevant to what is taking place within the context of the Human Rights commissions and their attendant Tribunals where truth no longer is considered valid and the sensibilities of particular individuals or groups have begun to trump what once were clearly defined laws as contained in Canada’s 1960 Bill of Rights and our more recent section 2 of the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In essence Mr. Finley you’ve encapsulated in a somewhat terse speech the growing anxiety felt among many Canadians today who sense that their legal rights are being sidelined and subverted by special interest groups and individuals who have taken it upon themselves to exploit what in retrospect appears to have been misguided and hastily conceived legislation such as that contained in sec. 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act; legislation enacted during a period of intense fear and terror brought on by the tragic events of 911. It is precisely this piece of pithy legislation that the Canadian Human Rights Commission is now using to destroy the very traditions that you’ve so succinctly outlined in your speech to the senate.

I thought it was most apropos Mr. Finley that you brought up the case of the young newspaper publisher Joseph Howe in Nova Scotia who was charged with seditious libel for having exposed some Halifax politicians. This naturally leads to my final comments respecting the nature and intent of your speech and its applicability to my own situation.

Like Joseph Howe, I too am a former newspaper publisher and currently, in the new times of the Internet, an online publisher and also like Joseph Howe I too have been charged with a crime although, unfortunately for me, it wasn’t seditious libel, as serious as that charge may be. Had it been I would have been given the opportunity to defend myself within an actual court of law where today, as opposed to Howe’s day, the norm is that truth is a defence. But, as fate would have it, I was charged under sec. 13(1) of the CHR Act back in November of 2007 with what amounts to a thought crime and to date my struggle to fend off this attack against my good name and my sole proprietorship, RadicalPress.com is still wending its way through the quasi-judicial process that you have clearly identified as having “egregiously violated freedom of speech without any shame.”

My case, currently identified within the files of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal as Harry Abrams and The League For Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and RadicalPress.com, File Number: T1360/9008, like 99% of all similar sec. 13(1) cases, is being fought solely by myself due to the reality that I could not afford to hire a competent lawyer and therefore was forced to act in a pro se capacity.

After more than two years of litigation and constant stress and the inability to work in a regular fashion the toll taken upon my business and my person and my family has been unduly harsh and to date there is no end in sight unless this vexatious and undemocratic legislation is removed from the statutes and those who have misused it are held accountable.

I would kindly remind you that in your call for an inquiry into the erosion of freedom of speech here in Canada you requested five things, the third one being: “to show moral support for those who are battling censors.” That call Mr. Finley, rings loud and clear right across this great nation and finds a resonant place directly within the mind and heart of the author of this letter to you. At no greater time could such a welcome show of support appear than during this dark hour of oppression that has plagued my name, my business, my family and my sacred and sacrosanct rights held under Canada’s beleaguered Constitution.

I ask this support not only for myself but for all those who have had their names and reputations and livelihood tarnished and threatened by these egregious and unjust laws and remain,

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham
Publisher & Editor
RadicalPress.com

Filed Under: Alternative Media, Anti-Defamation League (ADL), anti-Semitism, Arthur Topham/ Contributor, B'nai Brith, Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Canadian Identity/Sovereignty, Canadian Jewish Congress, Canadian Politics, Editor's Zone, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Thought, Harry Abrams, Internet Freedom, Jewish Lobby, Law & Justice, Marc Lemire, Political Zionism

Blessings and Peace and Love to All on this Easter Sunday from RadicalPress.com

April 4, 2010 by

Ressurrection

         Mathis Grunewald – Resurrection, 1512 – 1516
_____________________________________________________________ 

Filed Under: Christianity, Editor's Zone, Spirituality

Friends of Freedom: Write your Senator and demand an inquiry on the Erosion of Freedom in Canada.

April 4, 2010 by

Friends of Freedom
Write your Senator and demand an inquiry on the Erosion of Freedom in Canada.

Dear Friends of Freedom:

On March 30 2010, Senator Doug Finley rose in the Senate of Canada and publicly asked for an inquiry on the erosion of freedom of speech in Canada.

Freespeechers and Bloggers need to unite and make our views known to all Senators.  Freedom of speech is a fundamental right and we need to express our support for Senator Finley’s request for an inquiry.

Please put aside some time and write a letter to all senators demanding they proceed with calling the inquiry.

Senator Finey stated:

“Honourable senators, I call for this inquiry to accomplish five things: first, to reaffirm that freedom of speech is a great Canadian principle that goes back hundreds of years; second, to put Canada’s censors on notice that their days of infringing upon our freedoms with impunity are over; third, to show moral support for those who are battling censors; fourth, to inquire into the details of what went so desperately wrong at the University of Ottawa to ensure that those awful events never happen again; and, fifth, to inspire a debate that hopefully will lead to a redefinition of section 13.1 of the Human Rights Act.

Honourable senators, there are times for partisan debate when parties must naturally be at odds with one another. This is not one of those times. Freedom of speech and respect for differing views is a foundational principle of our entire parliamentary system — indeed, of our entire legal system, as well.”

The words by Senator Finley are a call to Canadians to get involved.   He went on to say that “If we can rededicate our Parliament to protecting this most important right, we will have done our country a great service, but if we fail to stop and indeed reverse this erosion of freedom, we will have failed our most basic duty, the duty to uphold our constitution and the rights in it, the rights it guarantees for all Canadians.”

Please find attached to this email, a complete list of Canadian Senators who have an email address. A complete list of senators can be found at:  http://parl.gc.ca

————————————————————

Sample letter written by Marc Lemire to all Canadian Senators:

April 3, 2010

To: Senator Doug Finley
The Senate of Canada,
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada
K1A 0A4
Freedom of Speech in Canada

Dear Senator;

I am writing today to express my support for your March 30, 2010 statement in the Senate of Canada on the Erosion of Freedom of Speech in Canada.  I would welcome a Senate inquiry on freedom of speech.

By way of background, I have been battling the fanatical Canadian Human Rights Commission for the past seven years.  Back in 2003 a complaint was filed against my website, the Freedomsite [ http://www.freedomsite.org ] which alleged that my website promoted hatred and/or contempt in violation of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.  In September 2009, after a 32 day hearing, I was completely exonerated for alleged hate speech, and Section 13 was found to be unconstitutional.  Although the case took 6 years, and in the end I “won”, I was not able to claim a cent of compensation for dragging me though the system.

As a result of my 6 year persecution, I have amassed the largest collection of critical material on the CHRC and their systemic corruption.  These documents show the abuse, totalitarianism and corruption of the CHRC.  If an inquiry is called, I would like to present some of this shocking information to the Senate.

The information which I have uncovered includes:

• CHRC theft of internet communications
• CHRC staff signing onto questionable websites and entrapping people
• CHRC staff’s contempt for freedom of speech, including their testimony that “Freedom of speech is an American concept”
• 99% conviction rate before the Tribunal
• The corrupt investigations of the CHRC, which includes dismissing a complaint because it was a “double-sided” fax
• CHRC exchanging information with Police and others, thus usurping safeguards in criminal law
• CHRC contravening the Canada Post Act, by setting up mail drops in Ottawa, to send out hate posters to receive mail under false names
• CHRC editing court transcripts to remove explosive testimony about the CHRC #1 complainer,  then distributing copies of the doctored transcripts to members of the media
• Decision from the Office of the Privacy Commission, chastising the CHRC for refusing to release information

HRCommissionCartoon

The CHRC: an Affront to all Canadians

Canadians are sick and tired of the totalitarianism of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and their obsession to restrict freedom of speech on the Internet. Editorials from every major newspaper across Canada have demanded that Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act needs to be scrapped.  The Canadian “Human Rights” Commission (CHRC) has become the single largest threat to freedom of expression, religion and personal beliefs in Canada’s History.

Sections 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act are a direct attack on the freedom of expression guaranteed to us under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The provisions of these sections allow the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to prosecute anyone alleged to have said or written something “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” whether there is a living, breathing victim or not.

Vague concepts such as speech or writing “liable to cause hatred or contempt” are the basis of expensive state-funded prosecution of individuals. The statute provides no objective legal test for “hate” or any objective means of determining what constitutes “contempt”. As a result, the CHRC is used by various groups and individuals, as a risk-free taxpayer funded method to silence their critics and those they disagree with. CHRC investigators have testified that that “freedom of speech is an American concept” and therefore not valid in Canada. Such statements are contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but are standard operating procedure at the CHRC.

Commissioners of the Canadians Human Rights Tribunal, who are not judges and are often not even lawyers, have held that “truth” is not a defence against prosecution under Section 13.  Intent or fair comment are also not defenses.  In fact, there is not a single listed defence under Section 13! Because of the lack of any defenses, the Tribunal has a 99% conviction rate since 1978. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal routinely ignores the principles of fundamental justice, such as the rules of evidence, and these kangaroo courts, even allow hearsay evidence.  The CHRA provides for each Tribunal to make up the rules as they go.

Every journalist, writer, Internet webmaster, publisher and private citizen in Canada can be the subject of a Human Rights complaint for expressing an opinion or telling the truth. Given the ambiguity of Section 13, it is virtually impossible for any individual to determine if they might be in violation of Section 13. Arbitrary censorship and punishment are wrong, and cannot be justified in a free society.

Photobucket
“Human Rights Commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society…It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.”

(Stephen Harper BC Report Newsmagazine, January 11, 1999)

HRCartoon

Hallmarks of Suppression

1: The Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal are not fair, and make arbitrary decisions based on who an accused is rather than on a fair and impartial application of the statute they enforce. High profile accused, such as Macleans, Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant are given a free pass, while others, less prominent and lacking the resources to hire legal council are relentlessly prosecuted. This creates a chill on the freedom of expression since there is no discernible “line” between speech that is prohibited and speech that is “acceptable” to the CHRC.

2: The CHRC pays no heed to constitutionally protected rights such as Freedom of Expression. In place they use imaginary “rights” such as the “right to be free from contempt”. There is no such right in our Charter. Both the CHRC and the Attorney General’s office considered freedom of speech to be an American concept that does not apply to Canadians. The CHRC only believes in “group” rights, and not the rights of individuals to “speak truth to power”, hence the 99% conviction rate.

3: The CHRC is out of control and is currently under three investigations. CHRC investigators are under criminal investigation by the RCMP for the criminal theft of telecommunications services; the Privacy Commissioner is investigating complaints of CHRC breaches of personal privacy; and CHRC investigation techniques are under review by the Parliamentary Justice Committee. In the meantime, the CHRC continues to apply the law in an arbitrary and capricious manner.

4: The CHRC engages in clandestine spying on Canadians including using aliases to engage others in conversation and writing questionable material while asking for support for views of the alias for use in a subsequent prosecution.

5: The entire process is paid for by taxpayers on behalf of the complainants. The defendants must pay their costs personally. There is no legal aid and there is no way to claim costs, even if the defendants are found innocent.

Over the past few years, the CHRC has tried to bump itself up into a quasi National Security type agency.  Shamelessly, this politically motivated outfit operates in almost complete secrecy, with no rules, no public oversight and continually deflects Access to Information requests over their activities with absurd claims of “security”.

The CHRC has employed some very shady and possibly illegal tactics including;

• Hijacking a private citizens Wireless Internet connection to connect to neo-Nazi websites and print of material and post messages
• infiltration and spying operations on Canadians
• the use of private police databases such as CPIC, (which holds records of millions of Canadians, including data such as dental records, known aliases, addresses, last contact with police, etc)
• infiltration of internet message boards

• telephone record searches

• motor vehicle record searches

• search warrants

• and even tenancy agreements for rental properties.

Because the CHRC is exempt from parliamentary oversight and doesn’t report to a minister, in enjoys carte blanche to do exactly as it pleases.  Inside the CHRC, there are no guidelines on how they need to investigate complaints.  Nor are there any rules on what CHRC employees can do in the course of investigations.  This includes even the totally unacceptable practice of trying to entrap respondents dragged before the CHRC.

Furthermore, to Canada’s great shame, in any Human Rights Commission case, truth is no defence!  It’s a slap in the face of 200 centuries of jurisprudence as intent, malice, effect, fair comment – none of these factors are taken into account by CHRC Tribunals. In fact, if you argue the truth of your statements, it is then used as proof of your guilt, and a rational to increase the amount of fines! Under the legislation there are no defences available. Is it any wonder that from 1977 to 2009 not a single person in over 32 years has ever won?

Tribunals and political inquisitions have no place in Canada. Recently, David Warren writing in the Ottawa Citizen called the Tribunal a “Kangaroo court” and “Star Chamber”. Others have compared them to the Communists, the Nazis, and the medieval Inquisition.  We need to stop the censorship enforcers and let freedom of speech reign. It’s time to abolish the Canadian Human Rights Commission and pack off this shameful censorship outfit to the “embarrassing lapses” dustbin of history.

I hope to hear from you on this pressing issue.

__________________________
Marc Lemire

Email:  marc@lemire.com

Members of Parliament who have openly stated their support for a repeal of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act:

Liberal MP Keith Martin
Liberal MP Dan McTeague
Conservative MP Brad Trost
Conservative MP Rob Anders
Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber
Conservative MP John Baird
Conservative MP James Rajotte
Conservative MP Bruce Stanton
Conservative MP Lee Richardson
Conservative MP Russ Hiebert
Conservative MP Kevin Sorenson
Conservative MP Helena Guergis
Conservative MP Nina Grewal
Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre
Conservative MP Rick Dykstra
Conservative MP John Williams
Conservative MP Rick Casson
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson

Filed Under: Anti-Defamation League (ADL), anti-Semitism, B'nai Brith, Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Canadian Identity/Sovereignty, Canadian Jewish Congress, Editor's Zone, Ezra Levant, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Thought, Human Rights/orgs, Internet Freedom, Jewish Lobby, Maclean's magazine, Marc Lemire, Mark Steyn, Political Zionism, Richard Warman, Sec. 13, Senator Doug Finley

Canadian Senators support Freedom of Speech and slam “Human Rights” Censorship

April 2, 2010 by

Canadian Senators support Freedom of Speech and slam “Human Rights” Censorship

SenatorFinley

Canadian Senator Doug Finley slams “Human Rights” Commissars
_______________________________________________________________

Canadian Senators support Freedom of Speech and slam “Human Rights” Censorship

“…our own Canadian Human Rights Commission has egregiously violated freedom of speech without any shame. In a censorship trial in 2007, a CHRC investigator named Dean Stacey testified that, “Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.” He actually said that. The Canadian Human Rights Commission actually admits they do not give free speech any value. That is totally unacceptable.”

Senator Finley – Senate of Canada – March 30, 2010

———————————————————–

SenateDebatejpg

Debates of the Senate (Hansard)

3rd Session, 40th Parliament,
Volume 147, Issue 13

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

http://parl.gc.ca/40/3/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-E/013db_2010-03-30-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=40&Ses=3#52

Erosion of Freedom of Speech

Inquiry—Debate Adjourned

Hon. Doug Finley rose pursuant to notice of March 25, 2010:

That he will call the attention of the Senate to the issue of the erosion of Freedom of Speech in our country.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise to call the attention of the Senate to the erosion of freedom of speech in Canada.

There can scarcely be a more important issue than this one. Freedom of speech is, and always has been, the bedrock of our Canadian democracy. The great Alan Borovoy, who was the head of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association for more than 40 years, calls freedom of speech a “strategic freedom” because it is a freedom upon which all other freedoms are built. For example, how could we exercise our democratic right to hold elections without free speech? How could we have a fair trial without free speech? What is the point of freedom of assembly if we cannot talk freely at such a public meeting?

Freedom of speech is a most important freedom. Indeed, if we had all our other rights taken away we could still win them back with freedom of speech.

Benjamin Franklin once said: “Without Freedom of thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of speech.”

Freedom of speech is embedded in Parliament’s DNA. The word “Parliament” itself comes from the French word “parler,” to speak. As parliamentarians we guard our freedom jealously. No member of the House of Commons or the Senate may be sued for anything that is said in Parliament. Our freedom of speech is absolute.

Yet, only last week, a few miles from here, censorship reared its ugly head. Ann Coulter, an American political commentator, had been invited to speak at the University of Ottawa. Before she even said a word, she was served with a letter from François Houle, the university’s vice-president, containing a thinly veiled threat that she could face criminal charges if she proceeded with her speech.

On the night of her speech, an unruly mob of nearly 1,000 people, some of whom had publicly mused about assaulting her, succeeded in shutting down her lecture after overwhelmed police said they could not guarantee her safety.

Honourable senators, it was the most un-Canadian display that I personally have seen in years. It was so shocking that hundreds of foreign news media covered the fiasco, from the BBC to The New York Times to CNN. It was an embarrassing moment for Canada because it besmirched our reputation as a bastion of human rights — a reputation hard won in places like Vimy Ridge, Juno Beach and Kandahar.

More important than international embarrassment is the truth those ugly news stories revealed. Too many Canadians, especially those in positions of authority, have replaced the real human right of freedom of speech with a counterfeit human right not to be offended.

An angry mob is bad enough. That may be written off as misguided youth, overcome by enthusiasm. However, such excuses are not available to a university vice-president who obviously wrote his warning letter to Ms. Coulter after careful thought.

Ann Coulter is controversial, she is not to everyone’s taste, but that is irrelevant because freedom of speech means nothing if it applies only to people with whom we agree. To quote George Orwell: “Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

In a pluralistic society like Canada, we must protect our right to peacefully disagree with each other. We must allow a diversity of opinion, even if we find some opinions offensive. Unless someone counsels violence or other crimes, we must never use the law to silence them.

Freedom of speech is as Canadian as maple syrup, hockey and the northern lights. It is part of our national identity, our history and our culture. It is section 2 of our 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, listed as one of our “fundamental freedoms;” and it is in the first section of Canada’s 1960 Bill of Rights.

Honourable senators, our Canadian tradition of liberty goes much further back than that. In 1835, a 30-year-old newspaper publisher in Nova Scotia was charged with seditious libel for exposing corruption amongst Halifax politicians. The judge instructed the jury to convict him. At that time, truth was not a defence. The publisher passionately called on the jury to “leave an unshackled press as a legacy to your children.” After only 10 minutes of deliberations, the jury acquitted him. That young man, of course, was Joseph Howe, who would go on to become the premier of Nova Scotia.

Our Canadian tradition of free speech is even older than that. It is part of our inheritance from Great Britain and France.

[Translation]

Quebecers are heir to article 11 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, 1789. This article states:

The free communication of thought and opinion is one of the most invaluable rights of the man; any citizen can thus speak, write, [and] print freely. . .

France has produced some of the most well-known defenders of free speech in the world.

(1650)

François-Marie Arouet, better known by his pen name, Voltaire, was a polemicist who used satire and criticism to press for political and religious reforms. He paid a personal price, facing censorship and legal threats.

[English]

Voltaire put it best when he famously wrote, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” His passionate advocacy helped shape liberty on both sides of the Atlantic.

English Canada has an impressive legacy of free speech, too. Like Voltaire, John Milton, the great poet who wrote Paradise Lost, was constantly hounded for his political views. His 1644 pamphlet on free speech, Areopagitica, perhaps the greatest defence of free speech ever written, is as relevant today as it was 350 years ago. In it, Milton wrote, “Let Truth and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worst, in a free and open encounter?” and, “He who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, but he who destroys a good book kills reason itself . . .”

Yet, despite our 400-year tradition of free speech, the tyrannical instinct to censor still exists. We saw it on a university campus last week, and we see it every week in Canada’s misleadingly named human rights commissions.

This week in Vancouver, a stand up comedian named Guy Earl has been on trial before the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal for the crime of telling jokes that someone did not find funny. An audience member who heckled him is suing him for $20,000 because she found his retorts offensive. They may have been offensive, but what is more offensive is that a government agency would be the arbiter of good taste or humour. Nobel Prize winner Alexander Solzhenitsyn was sentenced to eight years of hard labour for telling a joke about Stalin’s moustache. It is a disgrace that Canada is now putting comedians on trial.

There is not a lot that the Senate can do about the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, but our own Canadian Human Rights Commission has egregiously violated freedom of speech without any shame. In a censorship trial in 2007, a CHRC investigator named Dean Stacey testified that, “Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.” He actually said that. The Canadian Human Rights Commission actually admits they do not give free speech any value. That is totally unacceptable.

Freedom of speech is the great non-partisan principle that every Member of Parliament can agree on — that every Canadian can agree on. I will never tire of quoting the great Liberal Prime Minister Wilfred Laurier when he said that Canada is free and its freedom is its nationality. I will readily give credit to Keith Martin, the Liberal MP from British Columbia, who two years ago introduced a private member’s motion to repeal the censorship provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Honourable senators, I call for this inquiry to accomplish five things: first, to reaffirm that freedom of speech is a great Canadian principle that goes back hundreds of years; second, to put Canada’s censors on notice that their days of infringing upon our freedoms with impunity are over; third, to show moral support for those who are battling censors; fourth, to inquire into the details of what went so desperately wrong at the University of Ottawa to ensure that those awful events never happen again; and, fifth, to inspire a debate that hopefully will lead to a redefinition of section 13.1 of the [Canadian] Human Rights Act.

Honourable senators, there are times for partisan debate when parties must naturally be at odds with one another. This is not one of those times. Freedom of speech and respect for differing views is a foundational principle of our entire parliamentary system — indeed, of our entire legal system, as well.

I look forward to the constructive comments of my friends and colleagues on both sides of the aisle to build on the bipartisan history that Canadian free speech enjoys. If we can rededicate our Parliament to protecting this most important right, we will have done our country a great service, but if we fail to stop and indeed reverse this erosion of freedom, we will have failed our most basic duty, the duty to uphold our constitution and the rights in it, the rights it guarantees for all Canadians.

I know that, like so many generations of Canadians before us, we will meet the challenges of our time and live up to our responsibility to pass on to our children the same freedoms that we inherited from our parents. God keep our land glorious and free.

———–

Filed Under: Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Anne Coulter, Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Areopagitica, B'nai Brith, Babylonian Talmud, Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, Canadian Identity/Sovereignty, Canadian Jewish Congress, Canadian Politics, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Editor's Zone, Elizabeth Dilling, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Thought, George Orwell, Guy Earl, Human Rights/orgs, Internet Freedom, John Milton, Law & Justice, Marc Lemire, Political Zionism, Senator Doug Finley, Voltaire

Vatican compares child molestation scandal to “persecution of the Jews” by Michael Hoffman

April 2, 2010 by

GoodFriday

                      Descent from the Cross, 1612 Peter Paul Rubens

_________________________________________________________________________

Vatican compares child molestation scandal to “persecution of the Jews”
by Michael Hoffman
Good Friday, 2010

www.RevisionistHistory.org
hoffman@hoffman-info.com

This would be hilarious if it were not so depraved and disgusting. The crypto-rabbi wing of Judeo-Churchianity (Rev. Fr. Cantalamessa, Pope Benedict) trying to curry favor, on Good Friday, with the rabbis of the Judeo wing,  compare the uproar over the culture of child-molestation facilitation in the Catholic hierarchy (Mahony, Driscoll, Skylstad still in power; Bernard Law, fugitive from justice, made Arch Priest of a Roman basilica) with the “persecution of the Jews.”

Here we have prima facie evidence that Cantalamessa and his enabler, Pope Benedict, are not Catholic. “Persecution of the Jews” is the historic cry of the Freemasons and rabbis against the saints and theologians of the early and medieval Church.

To claim that worldwide anger over child molestation facilitation by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church is comparable to unjust “persecution of the Jews” is self-indicting. To make this claim on Good Friday is blasphemy. It signifies that the current usurpers who occupy the Church are as phony as the paranoid and megalomaniac ADL [Anti-Defamation League of B'nai Brith. A.T.] that sees “persecution of the Jews” in every stubbed Zionist toe.

Moreover, what is the definition of “persecution of the Jews”? Is it “persecution” when freedom of speech is in place to permit educating the public concerning the murderous racism in the Talmud that inspires Israeli mass murder in Palestine? Is it “persecution” when the stories of execution gas chambers in Auschwitz are questioned by scientists and publishers? Is it “persecution” when Israeli generals are compared to Nazis when they butcher the people of Gaza?

As for “collective” punishment what of the collective punishment of German civilians during and after World War II? What of the ongoing collective punishment of the populations of Lebanon and Palestine by the “state of Israel,” egged on by homicidal maniacs known as Orthodox “settler” rabbis?

If the Vatican was truly Catholic and Christ-like it would announce to the world that every child-molestation facilitator, beginning with Cardinal Roger Mahony in Los Angeles, have been removed from office and shipped to a Trappist monastery while they await state prosecution — with the Vatican fully cooperating with the prosecutors. Bernard Law would be extradited from Vatican City back to Boston to face justice. Instead, the Vatican continues to keep these and other evil bishops (Skylstad, Driscoll ad nauseum) in power while the Vatican sobs about “exaggerated” charges of a culture of child molestation facilitation existing in the Church.

The Vatican is the enemy of the Catholicism of the early and medieval Church, and thus today it appears without shame, on Good Friday, like Martin Gray, author of “For Those I Loved,” a book filled with his sorrowful ordeal as a persecuted Judaic “Holocaust Survivor” who was supposedly forced to help clear bodies out of the Treblinka “gas chamber.” In truth, Gray and his book were fakes. In fact, he was a decorated officer in the Soviet NKVD  responsible for the murder of Christians and gentiles, posing as a poor persecuted Chosen One. This is the pattern of despicable fraud and shetl chicanery which the pope and his papal household preacher, sunk  in the ethos of Holocaustianity, mount as an alibi and imitate as a form of self-defense.

Alas, the rabbinic racketeers will never surrender their monopoly on persecution to the hated papacy, even when the “Holy See” is occupied by a co-conspirator who is so inept he imagines he can grab a share of the persecution paranoia and co-opt Judaism’s most cherished, trademarked brand. Consequently this disgraceful Vatican pandering to the ideological heirs of those who demanded the death of Jesus, is now backfiring.

Note that in a palimpsest of falsification, the Zionist media keeps the pressure on Benedict by portraying this agent of the Synagogue as quasi antisemitic. This ruse serves a two-fold function: 1. it keeps Benedict pandering ever more to the rabbis, offering ever more craven concessions and servile compromise; and 2. it gives the 39-watt filaments of the Remnant newspaper types within traditional Catholicism the opportunity to claim that poor, pitiful Pope Benedict is a Catholic bastion against the synagogue! (Somewhere the masters of the Zohar are grinning).

For those who own a copy of my book “Judaism Discovered,” you will find a dossier on the deceitful word games played by the crypto-rabbi “preacher of the papal household,” Raniero Cantalamessa. ” Cf. pp.
389-390 and 414-418.
———
The HOFFMAN WIRE is a public service of

Independent History and Research, Box 849, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 83816 USA

24 Hour Revisionist News Bureau:
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/page1/news.html
Subscribe:  HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com

Disclaimer: The Hoffman Wire is a controversial and politically incorrect e-mail letter intended only for those who have requested it.  We have a strict anti-spamming policy. The views expressed in the Hoffman Wire are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not reflect the views of advertisers or the transmitter.

Freedom of the Press: A hallowed right.
Responsible Dissent: A contribution to understanding and dialogue.
–^—————————————————————-

Filed Under: 'state' of Israel, Anti-Defamation League (ADL), anti-Semitism, B'nai Brith, Babylonian Talmud, Christian Zionists, Christianity, Conspiracy, Editor's Zone, Elizabeth Dilling, Gaza, Jewish Lobby, Jews, Judaism, Political Zionism, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion