[Editor's Note: The image above was the logo for the Quesnel Multicultural Society which was formed back in 1983. The design was by a local graphic artist by the name of Jason Curtis who was a very close friend of mine. I was one of the founding members of this organization. Some people, like those who represent B'nai Brith Canada would rather that I was a founding member of a white supremacist organization or a neo-Nazi organization or some other org that they could then point to and say "Look, we told you so! He's a racist and an anti-Semite and a hatemonger. See! See! See!"
The following Motion was sent to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in response to the Tribunal's recent ruling on a previous motion of mine regarding the Canadian Human Rights Commission's tampering with evidence crucial to the complaint case now before the Tribunal. For some as yet unknown reason the Commission is claiming that it doesn't have in its files the one document which the Complainant Harry Abrams was the MOST vociferous about in his feigned outrage over articles posted on RadicalPress.com that he claims are promoting "hatred toward Jews and/or citizens of Israel."
The article in question is The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion which can be found at: http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=601 This motion makes it clear to the Commission that they are not playing fair in allowing the Commission to attempt to pull the wool over my eyes and the eyes of the public in allowing this obvious miscarriage to continue.
Harry Abrams, in a letter to the Quesnel Cariboo Observer, back in January of 2008 clearly states that he complained of this document to the Commission yet the Commission is trying to say that they don't have it in their files. Not only that but they've been carrying on in a most un-judical manner in parroting the rants of the Zionist B'nai Brith about the terribly and aweful nature of this roadmap of the 20th Century.
It's difficult for many people to imagine that an organization like this would stoop to such low tactics but when one begins to pull away the veil that that these people hide behind such actions appear to be standard practise within the Canadian "Human Rights" Commissariat.]
MOTION FOR FURTHER DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS FROM COMPLAINANTS ABRAMS AND THE LEAGUE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS OF BÃ¢â‚¬â„¢NAI BRITH CANADA
The Radical Press
Box 4633 Barkerville Hwy
Quesnel, B.C. V2J 6T8
Email: email@example.com Ã‚Â
June 9,Ã‚Â 2009
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Dear Nancy Lafontant,
RE: Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of BÃ¢â‚¬â„¢nai Brith Canada v. Arthur Topham and the RadicalPress.com
File Number: T1360/9008
The enclosed motion is in regard to the June 2, 2009 email letter from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal containing Tribunal member Karen JensenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s decision with respect to my motion (1) of April 22, 2009, to rescind Daniel PoulinÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s denial of further disclosure of documents.
In her decision Tribunal member Jensen makes two relevant statements which bear upon this current motion:
The first, with respect to the CommissionÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s statement that Ã¢â‚¬Å“because of its very nature as one of the most notorious anti-Semitic pieces of literature ever created; there should be no need to have a party disclose itÃ¢â‚¬Â, Jensen states, Ã¢â‚¬Å“The parties are reminded that they are subject to an ongoing duty to disclose all documents in their possession that are arguably relevant to the case whether anti-Semitic or not.Ã¢â‚¬Â
JensenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s second statement concerns the CommissionÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s avowed position that it does not possess the contentious document known as The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and therefore cannot be expected to disclose it in its Statement of Particulars as requested by the Respondent.
In her ruling, Jensen states, Ã¢â‚¬Å“Ã¢â‚¬ÂHowever, if a document is not in a partyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s possession, it cannot be disclosed. I take Commission counselÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s word that the Commission is not in possession of the document entitled Ã¢â‚¬Å“Protocols of the Learned Elders of ZionÃ¢â‚¬Â.
What this ruling establishes thus far, regarding my motion of April 22, 2009, is that the Tribunal is taking the Ã¢â‚¬Å“wordÃ¢â‚¬Â of Commission counsel that the Commission doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t possess said document but that if any Ã¢â‚¬Å“arguably relevantÃ¢â‚¬Â document is in the possession of any of the parties it is their Ã¢â‚¬Å“dutyÃ¢â‚¬Â to disclose it.
Based upon this decision the problem posed by the missing document Ã¢â‚¬Å“The Protocols of the Learned Elders of ZionÃ¢â‚¬Â naturally must revert back to the source from whence it first arose, that being the Complainants Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of BÃ¢â‚¬â„¢nai Brith Canada.
In order to re-establish my position on this matter I must remind the Tribunal of what I wrote in my letter of April 20, 2009 to Commission counsel Daniel Poulin:
Ã¢â‚¬Å“The foundational basis for the complaint against myself, Arthur Topham and my website www.RadicalPress.com by Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of BÃ¢â‚¬â„¢nai Brith Canada was, according to Mr. Abrams own words, the publication on my website of the historic document known variously as the Ã¢â‚¬Å“Protocols of the Learned Elders of ZionÃ¢â‚¬Â.
In Mr. AbramsÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ initial complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, received by your office August 28th, 2007, on the top of the list of articles which he and his co-complainant, the League for Human Rights of BÃ¢â‚¬â„¢nai Brith Canada, felt were Ã¢â‚¬Å“discriminatoryÃ¢â‚¬Â and contrived Ã¢â‚¬Å“to promote ongoing hatred affecting persons identifiable as Jews and/or as citizens of IsraelÃ¢â‚¬Â, was the following:
This article, broken into a series of four parts, did not appear on the website before many of [the] other articles which Mr. Abrams also included in his list of offensive, Ã¢â‚¬Å“discriminatoryÃ¢â‚¬Â material and so it is safe to assume that Mr. Abrams felt it to be of special importance in his complaint.
Mr. Abrams, in deference to said article and in reply to a News Release concerning the complaint which I had sent to the media, (including the Quesnel Cariboo Observer), wrote a letter to the Editor of this newspaperÃ‚Â http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_cariboo/quesnelobserver/opinion/letters/14379867.html [since removed under threat of a law suit by Mr. Abrams]Ã‚Â which was published in the January 27, 2008 edition in which he stated:
Re: Freedoms are threatened, Feedback, the Observer, Jan. 23
Ã¢â‚¬Å“I am Harry Abrams, one of the complainants in the Arthur Topham Canadian Human Rights matter. My comments are brief and in respect of the fact that this matter is still in an early stage procedure[sic].
Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Code [sic] is misunderstood by many people. But its intention is clear. It is to encourage Canadians from all backgrounds to live civilly[sic] and peacefully together without incitement of hatred, which is socially caustic and divisive and often softens the ground for future violence.
I have alleged Topham maintains a website that contains substantive expression likely to incite hatred and contempt against Jews. One very specific item complained of is the re-publication of aspects of the notorious Czarist-era forgery: The Protocols of the Learned Elders of ZionÃ¢â‚¬Â¦.Ã¢â‚¬ÂÃ‚Â [bold and underlining is mine. AT]
Based upon the actual words of Harry Abrams we see that he has clearly stated Ã¢â‚¬Å“One very specific item complained of isÃ¢â‚¬Â¦The Protocols of the Learned Elders of ZionÃ¢â‚¬Â. [underlining is mine. AT] This is an undeniable fact and proof that he did submit this document to the Commission in his original complaint dated August 28th, 2007. It is also, I suggest, a scathing indictment as to the merits of simply taking the Ã¢â‚¬Å“wordÃ¢â‚¬Â of Commission counsel when it came to Tribunal member JensenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s decision to Ã¢â‚¬Å“declineÃ¢â‚¬Â my motion of April 22, 2009.
It is clearly evident in AbramsÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ own words that this document, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, was submitted to the Commission. Whether or not it got lost in the process of communicating it to the Commission is neither here nor there because the Tribunal obviously chose not to investigate the matter further than to take the Ã¢â‚¬Å“wordÃ¢â‚¬Â of counsel that it did not have the document. That leaves the matter still very much open to dispute in terms of whether the Commission in fact did have it and deleted it from its file or is simply not telling the truth and does have it but because it believes it to be so Ã¢â‚¬Å“anti-SemiticÃ¢â‚¬Â refuses to disclose it. Either way, for the Tribunal to simply go on the Ã¢â‚¬Å“wordÃ¢â‚¬Â ofÃ‚Â counsel flies in the face of Karen JensenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s previous statements to the parties involved in this complaint that the Tribunal is totally independent and separate from the Commission. If that were the case then the appropriate thing to do would be to have investigated the matter further.
But what IS firmly established, in my view, is that Harry Abrams has stated that he Ã¢â‚¬Å“complained ofÃ¢â‚¬Â this document to the Commission. ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s right there in black and white Ã¢â‚¬â€œ indisputable and undeniable. It would therefore be the height of hubris and Blind Justice on the part of the Tribunal to attempt to deny this obvious fact.
Given these circumstances: The fact that the Complainant Harry Abrams states that he complained of the article to the Commission plus the ruling of Tribunal member Jensen that all documents Ã¢â‚¬Å“arguably relevantÃ¢â‚¬Â regardless of whether a party feels it is Ã¢â‚¬Å“anti-Semitic,Ã¢â‚¬Â is duty-bound to disclose it, I would ask that the Tribunal once again review this important question and do its duty in terms of instructing the Complainants to once again disclose the Ã¢â‚¬Å“missingÃ¢â‚¬Â document, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, to the Commission, in both electronic and hard copy format, so that they do have it in their possession thus allowing this hearing to proceed in a manner distinguishable by its reputed fair, unbiased and impartial nature.
I would like to conclude by quoting further from my April 20, 2009 letter to Commission counsel Daniel Poulin wherein I stated,
Ã¢â‚¬Å“Ã¢â‚¬Â¦this particular document, due to its relative importance in establishing the libelous and vexatious nature of this complaint by the Mr. Abrams and the League for Human Rights of BÃ¢â‚¬â„¢nai Brith Canada, must be included in full in the Disclosures of both the CHRC and the two Complainants in the case. If not then it places me, the Respondent in the obvious and unfair position of having to reproduce the document in full in hardcopy for each of the parties involved in this complaint, a responsibility that is not only unjustified on the part of the commission and the Tribunal (as per the TribunalÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s own policies) but likely highly biased and prejudicial toward the Respondent who would incur an additional cost in terms of providing these documents in hardcopy to all parties concerned prior to the proposed hearing.Ã¢â‚¬Â
This missing document, like the alteration of the actual wording of the original complaint by the Commission, must be addressed prior to any hearing if the Tribunal wishes to be seen as independent and impartial. Thus I would ask the Tribunal to notify and instruct the Complainants to re-submit this document beforehand to the Commission and that both the Complainants and the Commission recognize and perform their lawful duty as sincere and honest litigants in these proceedings.
If there is any further formality or motion that you require, please let me know as soon as possible.
Arthur Topham pro se
Anita Bromberg, Co-complainant
Marvin Kurz,Ã‚Â Complainant Counsel
Harry Abrams, Complainant
Daniel Poulin, Commission counsel
Douglas Christie, Intervenor, Canadian Free Speech League