RadicalPress.com | AAA+ Replica Watches | Designer Replica Rolex Diamond Watches 2023

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.

Monday, July 17, 2006
Never Again
Gilad Atzmon
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2006/07/gilad-atzmon-never-again_17.html
The photo at the left [missing here. sorry. ed]is not a pornographic image of a Rabbi giving oral pleasure to a newly born Jewish baby. It is actually Mohel Rabbi Yosef David Weisburg sucking blood from a baby’s penis while performing a circumcision.
(The Jerusalem Post Magazine, Nov. 5, 1976, p. 14)[1]
Just six and a half decades ago, Jews were brutally spat out of Europe. As it happened, when the majority of European secular Jews were totally convinced that the condition of emancipation had finally matured into a comprehensive assimilation, the Nazi Judeocide was there to prove them wrong. Just two weeks ago, when the vast majority of the Israeli people were convinced that Peace was just about to prevail thanks to Sharon’s unilateral ‘peace initiative’, the Hamas and Hezbollah were there to prove them wrong.
And so it happened that Germany, which was nothing less than the promised land for Fritz Haber (the man who invented the WMD), Einstein (once a pacifist, later the man who convinced Roosevelt to allocate funds to the Manhattan Project), Buber (a German patriotic warmonger), Sholem, Benjamin, Adorno and many more, suddenly changed its spots. Within the short space of several years it transformed itself into the bitterest enemy the Jews have ever known. But Germany wasn’t an isolated case. As we all know it wasn’t Nazi Germany or the German people alone who actually exercised the destruction of European Jewry. The industrial homicide was indeed largely administrated by Nazi officers and operators, yet, most European nations willingly submitted their Jews to the Nazis[2]. Whether we like it or not, it was the Europeans who somehow collectively found themselves to be rather enthusiastic about transforming Europe into a ‘Jew-free Zone’.
Rather worryingly it is now evident that the Hebraic people failed to learn their lesson. In their attempt to erect a Jewish national home, namely Zion, they made every possible mistake. Rather than endorsing peaceful manners and loving their new neighbours, they have endorsed and exhibited the most brutal conduct possible. For almost six decades the Israeli army inflicts pain on Israel’s close neighbours in the name of the Jewish people. For almost six decades millions of Palestinians are living in refugee camps in atrocious conditions and the Jewish State does not permit them to come back. For almost six decades the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine are discriminated by the new colonialists.
However, one seems almost compelled to admit it, but it was indeed the devastating impressions of liberated death camps which transformed Zionism from being a very marginal Jewish nationalist racist fantasy into the voice of world Jewry. Yet, it was in 1948, just three years after liberation of Auschwitz when Zionism underwent the transformation from being a nationalist racist philosophy into a murderous reality. It was just three years after the liberation of Auschwitz when Zionists proved beyond doubt that they properly internalised the most devious Nazi tactics, philosophy and precepts. Already then in 1948 the Israeli legislators found themselves engaged in setting racist laws that were no different from Nuremburg Laws. Already then, in 1948, the IDF together with paramilitary groups were practicing some Nazi-like ethnic cleansing strategies. As we happen to learn, the Israeli ethnic cleansing agenda has never faded. Israelis, like their Zionist Elders, very much like their Asheknazi Rabbinical ancestors don’t really like to mix with Goyim. Contemporary Israel is a clear resurrection of the European Jewish ghetto. However, the Israeli ghetto is a vast improvement compared with the old east European Shtetl. In the Jewish State, it is the Goyim who are locked behind walls in places that seem to be no different from concentration camps.
In defence of the post-war Jewish inclination towards Zionism, one may suggest that considering the vast impression of the Holocaust, the collective move towards Zionism was rather reasonable. Being totally traumatised by the scale of hatred against them, Jews all over the world collectively agreed; ‘Never Again’. I know about it all just because I myself was raised on the ‘Never Again’ philosophy.
‘Never Again’ Jews would be led to the slaughter, I was taught year after year in an Israeli school located obviously on occupied Palestinian territory in East Jerusalem. ‘The new Jew’ i.e. Israeli, so they said, ‘would fight back’. And indeed we were ready to fight back. Moreover, we were keen to do so, in the name of the Jewish people, in the name of our history. We were launched to punish the Arabs for our unfulfilled future in lost Europe.
It took me many years to realise that the ‘Never Again’ that was initially portrayed as a moral argument, was actually non-ethical to the bone. It took me far too many years to realise that ‘within the Judeo-Centric universe, ‘Never Again’ means: ‘from now on, Never Again Jews go to the slaughter, instead, it is going to be the Jews who take others to the slaughter. Looking at Beirut and Gaza, this is indeed what Israel is all about: ‘a barbarian political system that is fuelled by others’ pain’.
While Emanuel Levinas, the post-war Jewish philosopher believed that after Auschwitz Jews would stand firmly at the forefront of any battle against inhumanity, discrimination, racism and other malaise of modern civilization, it seems that very much the opposite turns out to have happened. The Jewish State, with the support of their far too many Wolfowitzes and Dershowitzes, became the absolute embodiment of modern evil. Day by day we see the ‘strongest army in the Middle East’ squashing innocent civilians, whether in Gaza, Beirut or Jenin. The Israeli Army is blitzing civilian infrastructure of States that can never defend themselves. You may wonder why did the Israelis have to erase Beirut Airport? The answer is simple – just because they were capable of doing so. The Israelis are indeed thugs, but they are far from being ordinary ones. The Israelis are actually nothing but ‘self loving’ thugs. Very much like the stereotype Jewish mother, they are totally in love with their symptoms. They really have fun flattening their neighbouring countries. Seemingly they have never taken in the possibility that one day, sooner or later they will have to live in peace with all those one billion Arabs around them. Again, thugs always think in the ‘short term’.
I am left puzzled. Just six and a half decades ago Jews were kicked out of Europe. With the support of the United Nations the Israelites had a perfect chance to make the tragedy of their departure into a new peaceful start. They could easily look into their history and learn from their mistakes. Indeed very few did. One of them is Israel Shahak, another is Lenni Brenner. But as painful as it may sound, most Jewish secular institutes and scholars did quite the opposite. They made their past mistakes into their claim for fame. They made the newly-formed Jewish thug, the Israeli, into a cultural icon. In Israel, the thug culture made it into a norm. Time after time, Israelis have managed to vote in war criminals and mass murderers to be their prime ministers. Strangely enough, in the last election, when they were sure that peace was just about to prevail, they had voted a non-military prime minister. Yet as soon as the recent violent crisis erupted, Olmert and Peretz were very quick to use the ultimate military measures. They probably realise very well that arrogance, violence, brutality and barbarism is the Israeli raison d’être.
Sadly, we have to admit that Levinas’s prophecy was not forthcoming. Not only had Jews failed in collectively leading any recognised humanitarian cause, in the name of ‘Never Again’ global Zionism together with the Israeli lobby they are consciously pushing us all into WW3. This time in the name of a cultural clash.
History, Revisiting the Present
The Historian may suggest that knowledge of the past would help us to understand the present or even serve to safeguard the future. On the contrary, I would argue that any understanding of the past is in itself the direct product of the present discourse. In other words, it is our symbolic order currently in place that shapes our vision of any historical narrative. Practically speaking, it is the present carnage in Beirut and in Gaza inflicted by the Jewish State that will inevitably shape our take on Jewish history. The present Jewish State’s brutality will certainly lead towards the total collapse of the official Jewish historical narrative and its dominance in western discourse.
Though Simon Wiesenthal won’t agree, history isn’t merely a collection of some sporadic anecdotes i.e. historical facts, but rather a tale that links anecdotes into an intelligible narrative. Historical Narrative is a message that survives the present discourse and symbolic order. Considering the crude Israeli brutality, the Judeo-centric historical narrative in which Jews are the victims is doomed to collapse. At least dialectically, it is rather fascinating that the ‘Never Again’ attitude, happens to be a self destructive mechanism, a Judeo-centric, historically orientated precept that aims towards the end of Jewish History.
Without referring to the truth value in the Medieval tales of blood libel; without trying to suggest whether or not Jews made Matzos out of young gentile blood, the growing quantity of images of orchestrated murderous Israeli activity helps us to realise where such accusations may have come from. Without suggesting any historical narrative to do with WWII and the events leading to the destruction of European Jewry, it is the current Israeli murderous zeal against its next-door neighbours that may throw light onto the collective European tendency to brutally spit out the Jews. One may sit in front of the TV watching Beirut burning and say, ‘if indeed this is what these barbarians are doing to their neighbours, no wonder why no one wants them as a neighbour.’
It must be mentioned that Jewish collective blood-thirstiness isn’t exactly a Zionist invention. Amos Elon, the author of one of the largest compendiums of Jews in Germany, provides us with a very shocking chapter of Jewish patriotic warmongering to do with WWI. On the eve of the war, Chaim Weizmann, a prominent Zionist and later the first President of the Jewish State, admitted to the British Ambassador in Berlin saying ‘seemingly Jewish intellectuals were the most arrogant and belligerent of all Germans.’[3] Martin Buber, the iconic symbol of left Zionism and Jewish poetic peaceful pacifism, could not stop himself from celebration at the point of departure of the global slaughter. ‘Not in faith but in devotion is the divine revealed,’ said he, the prophet of the Jewish cultural renaissance[4]. ‘For Buber,’ says Amos Elon, ‘the war was a ‘sacred spring’ a wonderful purification through violence, he basked in the sheer moral beauty of it.’ Yes this wasn’t Adolf Hitler but the adorable ‘Zio-pacifist’ Martin Buber. But Buber was far from being alone, during the first weeks of the war even Freud succumbed to the general euphoria: ‘He couldn’t wait to see German troops march triumphantly into Paris.’[5]
Probably the most famous practitioner of poetic hate-mongering was the Jew Ernest Lissauer with his ‘Hymn of Hate against England’:
‘We shall hate you with a long lasting hate.
A hate that endures and will never abate
Hatred by sea and hatred by land
From those who wear crowns and those who work by their hand
Seventy million all as one man
United in love and united in woe
United in hatred of one single foe
England’
James W. Gerard, the American Ambassador in Berlin, reported in his memoirs that German Jews took pride of the ethnic origin of the above-cited sickening hate hymn. But the party didn’t last for very long. According to Elon, ‘the Anti-Semites were quick to turn the poem against Lissauer and the Jews. ‘Only Jews are capable of such hatred.’ Whether this is indeed the case, isn’t for me to judge. Yet, there is something worrying about the rapid transition of some secular Jews into war-mongers (Wolfowitz, Dershowitz), mass murderers (Kissinger, Sharon), and war criminals (Haber, Olmert, and the Israeli society). This is very concerning because Rabbinical Judaism though being far from an ethical worldview is far from being violent, aggressive or even sadistic.
Seemingly, the Israeli, a secular Jew, has managed to kill God. He has managed to set a civil law rather than a civilised one but somehow he failed to defeat the Jewish tribal barbarian zeal. Like Buber, Freud, Deshowitz, Haber, Wolfowitz and Lissauer, the Israeli man loves war (as long as he wins), he is ‘united in hatred of one single foe’ – the Arabs.
The modern Israeli Jew is no doubt a modern man, he doesn’t follow the bible, he doesn’t practice Judaism, he dumped God long time ago but bizarrely enough, he still chops his male baby’s foreskin when this infant is just eight days old. The modern Israeli is circumcising his son, he mutilates his son’s young body following a primitive tribal blood ritual, he lets a rabbi (a Mohel) injure his new born baby and then he watches the very same rabbi to suck the blood from his newly born son’s penis. Evidently, the modern secular Jew may have managed to assimilate but failed in merging into humanity. He is still an active participant in an ancient tribal bloodsucking ritual.
I am not an anthropologist, I cannot determine whether it is exactly the bloodsucking culture that turned Buber, Haber, Sharon, Peretz, Wolfowitz and Kissinger into mass bloodsuckers. But I do know that in my road in London, there are no participants in any ancient blood rituals. Somehow, it feels very safe. I think to myself that it is rather possible that once we enforce or at least convince Israelis and modern Jews to stop celebrating their bizarre rituals they may learn to love their neighbours almost as much as they love themselves. By the time this happens the cultural clash between Jewishness and humanity may be resolved. It is crucial to take into consideration that our collective image of Hamas and Hezbollah as mass murderers and bloodthirsty fanatics is just a projection made by those who happen to be active participants in blood rituals. In Lacanian language the ‘unconsciousness is the discourse of the other’ . In the Israeli practice the murderous inclination the Zionists referring to Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and the Hamas is just a mirroring reflection of Zionist murderous tendecies that are far from being repressed anymore.
The above is far from being an adequate logical or an analytical argument. It is merely a desperate suggestion made by a man who grew up there, in Zion, amongst self loving thugs and bloodsucking Mohels. It is a call made by a man who is trying for many years to get to the bottom of the notion of hatred. It is a call made by a man that was dreaming of playing a concert in Lebanon, a country he visited as a soldier 22 years ago. A country that was flattened to dust but has spent the last two decades resurrecting itself. A country that had a dream, a country that is once again being wiped out by its next door neighbour.
————————-
[1]http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/mohel.htm
‘There are three stages required for the performance of a ritually correct circumcision in Jewish law: the removal of the foreskin; the tearing of the underlying membrane so as to expose the glans completely; and the sucking away of the blood, m’tsitsah.’ Roger V. Pavey. The Kindest Cut of All. Bognor Regis, W. Sussex: New Horizon. 1981. pp. 87-88.
[2] If this isn’t enough, as Hanna Arendt pointed out already in the 1960’s, the Jewish death toll wouldn’t have been as great if not for Zionist and local Jewish leaders actually collaborating with Hitler in such an extensive manner. Seemingly the Hebraic leaders didn’t learn their lesson, rather than endorsing peaceful thinking they have chosen brutal conduct. For almost six deacades the Israeli army inflicts pain on Israel’s neighbours.
[3] Amos Elon, The Pity Of It All, Penguin Books 2004 pg 318
[4] ibid pg 319
[5] ibid pg 318
Author’s note: While rabbinical Judaism refers to circumcision as a spiritual ritual filled with some deep religious spiritual meaning, the secular and assimilated Jews keep performing the blood ritual as a matter of maintenance of the tribal exclusive identity.
———————
Editor’s note: Who can watch as a ‘spectator’ the wanton destruction first of Gaza and now of Lebanon and not feel immediately, after the rage settles down a bit, an enormous and frustrating sense of impotence? It is almost as if such gross, vulgar and indecent violence unleashed against a group of innocent men, women and children is ‘somebody else’s business, let’s just get the Europeans safely out of there’ and we can only just wait for the ‘international community’ to sort it out and in the meantime shake our heads in regret and wash our hands of it all.
Gilad Atzmon isn’t going to keep quiet about it, bless his soul. As a person who spent the first 30 years of his life there, and was raised to be convinced of the righteousness, or at least the reasonability of his country of birth, the land where he served as a soldier, he is well acquainted with the mindset, the policy and the structure of Israeli society. He, as an ‘insider’ can help us to see through the mist of deception and the continual grotesque excuse-making for violent atrocities committed against the Arabs of the Middle East. He is well aware of the violent undertones, which he calls aptly, ‘thug’, in a society where men and women are judged by their racial, religious or ethnic composition and are treated (or mistreated) accordingly. Nothing he says is a secret, it simply doesn’t usually make it through the censors on all sides, who have vested interests either in instability, war or maintenance of a myth.
He is chipping away at the block of ‘Israeli righteousness’ splinter by splinter. It’s possible that no sledgehammer of words will ever make a dent in that stone, because the foundations seem to be sunk quite firmly in the ground, and no matter how he hammers away, the stone seems to grow, the taboo against criticising anything remotely connected to the Jewish State and the driving forces behind it is so immense, that it seems unshakeable. The Western world prefers to look elsewhere but at Israel itself.
It is out of his spirit as a radical lover of life, disgusted by violence, but aware that resistance to an occupier and tormenter is not only a right, but it is a moral duty, that Gilad Atzmon denounces violence against innocent people, and reflects on the roots of that violence, hoping that one day soon, eyes are going to open and people will stop defending by rote violence just because the perpetrators are ‘the good guys like us, civilised Westerners’.
That blind ignorance, the refusal to even look, a total lack of self-reflection and deep self-critique is what will ensure the continued tolerance – if not outright support – for a system that remains in place in order to oppress people and control them, because they get in the way of bigger plans. Atzmon’s war is a war against ignorance, a cry to those who still have enough humanity to listen, that the destruction of other people’s lives is NOT tolerable, for the simple reason that the powerful get away with it by having thoroughly brainwashed the public opinion to look the other way or justify evil. We have been made terrified of speaking out against what is wrong, because we also know that we might be the next victims of the proto-fascist retaliation that comes in a million different guises.
Gilad Atzmon gave back his IDF uniform some time ago, but that doesn’t mean he has left the war. He is now serving the side of justice by showing us that the brainwashing CAN be reversed. He shows the Arab peoples that they are not alone, they will not be abandoned and people are going to support them more and more, even though it might not look that way right now. That sledgehammer he uses is just a laptop computer, and I am sure he knows that writing words is not going to be enough to stop the violence, but hopefully it can blow some minds wide open. Minds that have been sealed by a lifetime of propaganda.

[Editor’s Note: The following letter by Robin Mathews to the Chief Justice of the B.C. Supreme Court is a courageous and finely worded challenge to the person in charge of justice for all British Columbians. It’s essential that the questions which Mr. Mathews asks of the Chief Justice are forwarded to as many citizens as possible throughout this province to insure that the courts are made aware of the extent of the general dissatisfaction with the questionable processes and decisions that Mr. Mathews alludes to in his letter. Please pass this letter on to as many of your associates as you possibly can. For the sake of those still living in prison under false charges i.e. Betty Krawczyk and for justice concerning the unnecessary death of Harriet Nahanee consider this request of an urgent nature. Thank you. Arthur Topham, Editor and Publisher, The Radical Press]
—————
Open Letter to Chief Justice D. Brennan of the B.C. Supreme Court
Robin Mathews
520 Salsbury Drive,
Vancouver, B.C., V5L 3Z7,
April 12, 2007.
The Honourable D. Brenner,
Chief Justice,
Supreme Court of British Columbia,
800 Smythe Street, Vancouver,
British Columbia, V6Z 2E1
copies to: Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett, Madam Justice Brenda Brown, Ms. H. L. McBride, The Canadian Judicial Council, Concerned Canadians
Re: R.v. Basi, Basi, and Virk,
Registry No. VA23299
Re: District of Kitimat and Wozney v. Minister of Energy and Mines, the Attorney General of British Columbia and Alcan
Docket L050918
Re: Complaint against Madam Justice Brenda Brown to the Canadian Judicial Council concerning the Court-implicated death by draconian use of ‘criminal contempt’ of court and by the unnecessary incarceration of Harriett Nahanee, aged and ill Native environmental protester. [And the parallel draconian incarceration of Betty Krawczyk, non-Native protester, not addressed in the Complaint].
My Lord:
Law Officer of the Supreme Court of British Columbia H.L. McBride, replying (March 30) to a letter of mine to Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett concerning ‘public access to documents filed’ in the Basi, Basi, and Virk matter, repeated the objectionable terms of the general restriction of documents from public examination imposed by Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm obviously imposed with the approval or consent of judges involved and with your support. That so-called ‘Practice Direction’ has been explained as a device employed to insure the protection of the accused. In my own experience the substance of such documents does not bear negatively upon the accused; rather the denial of those public documents to the public appears to protect those who may be corrupt members of the present and past Gordon Campbell government and other highly placed people possessing political power in the province.
With respect, I submit to you that the so-called ‘Practice Direction’ which is in fact an illegitimate universal gag order is intolerable and is a violation of the freedoms of Canadians to know. I believe an address to the Supreme Court of Canada would see the so-called ‘Practice Direction’ struck down as illegitimate. I believe a process by writ of mandamus might have the same effect. With respect, I believe that any fair-minded person concerned with justice and the freedoms of Canadians would see the present so-called ‘Practice Direction’ as an intolerable, dictatorial, and repressive invasion of the freedoms and the tranquility of Canadians. If you do not see it as that, would you explain to me why you do not?
H.L McBride, in her letter of March 30, 2007, invited me to write to you if I ‘wish to obtain access to other documents which may be contained in the [Basi, Basi, and Virk] court file….’ (1) I wish the freedom to see all documents presently in the court file. Will you grant me that freedom?
(2) I request that you conduct a full review of the repressive protocol and write a letter to me (that may be made public) to state your findings.
In addition, I wish to record two matters with you concerning the behaviour of Madam Justice Bennett. First: in her letter of March 9 to me H. L. McBride wrote: ‘During the hearing [of March 6], Madam Justice Bennett … indicated that she will be establishing a protocol for media and public access to documents filed in this matter. In the future, copies of further documents ordered released may be obtained from the Criminal Registry upon payment of the usual photocopying charges.’
More than a month has passed and no protocol is in place though documents have, apparently, been filed. Since documents have been in the process of being filed for pre-trial hearings for months and months, why is Madam Justice Bennett delaying? Have you or Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm intervened to prevent her from making documents available? When an irrational and repressive system is put in place, as is the case with the so-called ‘Practice Direction’, any suspicion is possible because the essential crudeness of the system invites wide speculation.
Secondly, Madam Justice Bennett has presided in a court in which some of the main characteristics have been obstruction, delay, misinformation, and truculence on the part of some counsel and others outside the court. Why has she not employed threat of sanctions and then the invocation of sanctions misused in the cases of Harriett Nahanee and Betty Krawczyk but appropriate in the Basi, Basi, and Virk matters? Why is the Supreme Court of British Columbia practising, openly, a system of lenient or non-existent discipline for the probably corrupt and the powerful, and another system of penalty and censure more oppressive and harsh for principled, decent, and powerless Canadians?
That question must be answered.
In the matter of District of Kitimat and Wozney v. Minister of Energy and Mines, the Attorney General of B.C. and Alcan (Oct 16-20) you were the judge presiding; your decision was released in March, 2007.
With respect, I submit to you that your decision is wholly invalid and must be wholly invalidated by reason of your being in conflict of interest.
You were, in fact, the presiding judge in an action which saw a recent colleague of yours as a chief respondent; and to put the matter forcibly, Wally Oppal, Attorney General, might well have written the decision for you. That is a way of saying your judgement is so completely a reflection of his wishes in the matter that he might have authored the decision.
For some years Wally Oppal was your colleague in the Supreme Court. When he stepped from a position as an Appeal Court judge into a Gordon Campbell Liberal candidacy, he should have been publicly reproved by you as Chief Justice. As Attorney General of B.C. he could never appear before a B.C. Supreme Court colleague without being himself and placing the judge presiding in a position of conflict of interest.
In the specific case here referred to the Kitimat case you should have declared your unsuitability to preside over the action and you should have sought a judge from outside the Supreme Court of B.C. You did not take that simple precaution . With the deepest respect, I challenge your role in the matter and declare that I do not believe any reasonable and prudent Canadian can accept the judgement you made as an untainted judgement.
A number of matters contained in the judgement you wrote place it very seriously in question, and, I believe, place you in a highly equivocal position apart from the demonstrable conflict of interest. I will not refer to those matters here, now.
Re: Complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council against Madam Justice Brenda Brown concerning the court-implicated death by draconian use of ‘criminal contempt’ of court and by the unnecessary incarceration of Harriett Nahanee, aged and ill Native environmental protester. [And the parallel draconian incarceration of Betty Krawczyk, non-Native protester not addressed in the Complaint.]
As Chief Justice of the B.C. Supreme Court you must know the extent to which so-called ‘court orders’ and ‘injunctions’ (providing bases for declarations of ‘criminal contempt of court) have been discussed by the Canadian Judicial Council and declared to be the kinds of instrument rarely used. You must know, too, that those instruments are frequently used by members of the Supreme Court of B.C. You must know that they are instruments defined by the Canadian Judicial Council in May 2001 as ‘not governed by the rules of court’. That means you must know that a corrupt Supreme Court and any petty despots or servants of corrupt government present in that court may make use of extraordinary powers ‘not governed by the rules of court’ to attack, damage, violate or otherwise harm people not deserving of such action.
Cameron Ward, in his defence of Betty Krawczyk, said that the B.C. government of Gordon Campbell ‘has come up with a creative way of punishing political dissidents. Rather than have people charged with breaking laws enacted by their duly elected representatives, the conventional way of dealing with public order, the government enlists the courts to have objectionable conduct characterized as contempt of court. It does so by encouraging the use of injunctions issued in sham proceedings.’
One must extend the statement by Cameron Ward. What is ‘objectionable conduct’ to the Gordon Campbell circle may be in fact simply the full exercise of freedoms by Canadians. When police are asked to remove gatherings of people expressing political dissatisfaction with policy and with the violation of democratic processes, the result is wide and deep discussion absolutely necessary in a free society. The employment of ‘court orders’, ‘injunctions’ and ‘criminal contempt of court’ in such cases to clamp down on information and debate may be and often is, the use of repressive, anti-democratic, and intolerable behaviour on the part of the Supreme Court and its judges. They should be the defenders of the freedoms of Canadians against plots and manipulations by powerful governments and corporations.
Cameron Ward stated that Betty Krawczyk was victim of an ‘officially induced abuse of process’. Harriett Nahanee, many have suggested, was the murder victim of an ‘officially induced abuse of process’. That any Supreme Court judge in Canada would be a party to such behaviour brings the institution into serious risk of being held in contempt by a large part of the population. Such a situation cannot come to good.
If that is not bad enough, providing very powerful grounds for actions of serious discipline against Madam Justice Brenda Brown, two further, important matters must be set down. When concerned Canadians were told they could get reasons for the judgement against Betty Krawczyk at Criminal Registry in the Supreme Court building, they went there, gathered peaceably waiting for communication, and one of them reports were served with ‘a court injunction which threatened us with arrest’. As Chief Justice and, therefore, chief protector of the rights and freedoms of Canadians in the sanctity of Supreme Court space you cannot but be alarmed at such repressive and coercive behaviour. Please tell me who gave that order. Where is it recorded? What do you intend to do to assure Canadian freedoms in Supreme Court spaces in future?
In each of the matters to which I have referred in this letter you are the Chief Supreme Court officer. In each of the matters to which I have referred, I allege that reasonable and prudent Canadians would find cause for serious unhappiness at the behaviour of court officers and, alas, deep suspicion of their motivations. In each of the matters to which I have referred in this letter a simple question must be asked: are some judges of the Supreme Court of British Columbia and their servants acting to prevent ‘justice’ as that word has meaning to most Canadians, and are those judges knowingly (or even unknowingly) acting in a fashion that supports corrupt, repressive, anti-democratic, and lawless forces in the society?
If the answer to that question is ‘Yes’, then the task of more and more British Columbians will be to sweep the Supreme Court clean, to remove offending court officers, and to restore the Supreme Court of British Columbia to honesty and competence. Such a cleaning will have to take place if you fail to act on the matters I have raised and others of like nature unless British Columbia descends into the condition of a police state in which the highest court openly serves thieves and fascists.
Please examine each of the questions I have asked and please answer each one fully and carefully.
You must be aware that this letter does not arise from any dislike of the Supreme Court as an institution. On the contrary. It arises from deep respect for the B.C. Supreme Court and for all Canadian institutions intended to assure the tranquility of the people and the full and visible operation of judicial machinery when that tranquility is disturbed. It arises, moreover, from a deep understanding of the evil that results from courts that have become the instruments of the corrupt and the greedy for power. The primary intention of this letter, then, is to alert you to very real problems in the behaviour of some Supreme Court judges and to enlist your wisdom, your competence, and your authority in the task of resolving those problems.

[Editor’s Note: The following interview with Frank Martin and Helen Michell aka Telquaa took place back in June of 2001 and ran in Vol. 3 No. 10 of The Radical, Canada’s Activist Monthly Newspaper. Frank and Helen are still very much active in their ongoing struggles with the State, the Judicial system and the police and it is in their interest and that of public awareness that I am running this interview once again.]
———————
Frank & Helen Speak Out
Eddie John, B.C. Land Treaties, Residential School Abuse, Genocide and Native Justice
By Arthur Topham
Radical Reporter
June, 2001

(Original Editor’s Note: Frank Martin and Helen Michell first appeared in The Radical in conjunction with the Ed John scandal which, to date, still remains unresolved. They were two of many native people who had given sworn testimony during the UN-sponsored Tribunal into Residential School abuse which was held in June of 1998 in Vancouver, B.C. I was able to connect up with them while in Vancouver for the’Hearing That Wasn’t’ a phony court set-up designed to slap an injunction on The Radical and six others in order to prevent us from speaking about the issue of Ed John and Ujjal Dosanjh and the Pedophile/Drug Ring cover-up that they are alleged to have been a part of. Frank and Helen were two of the Defendants named in that lawsuit. The interview took place at their home in east Vancouver on Friday, May 11, 2001.)
Frank Martin, Telquaa (Helen) Michell and their family have been in the forefront of the struggle by indigenous peoples of BC to have the issue of treaty rights addressed in a just and equitable manner. Unassociated with any of the government ‘approved’ channels created by the Department of Indian Affairs, the Federal government of Canada and the B.C. Provincial government which have been set up in order to ‘handle’ the land title issues has meant that Telquaa and her husband Frank Martin great great grandson of famed totem carver Mungo Martin have had to operate outside the frameworks that were arbitrarily put in place to insure the eventual loss of traditional unceded native territories.
Like renegades within their own homelands Telquaa, Frank, their family members have fought and died in order to achieve recognition of their inherent rights as the legal owners of this area of land now called B.C. Along with that struggle has been the call for justice to address the outrage, discrimination and police brutality that has dogged their trail for well over a decade now.
For the purpose of this talk we pick up on the ongoing collusion by the trinity of government, church and residential school ‘clones’ who have conspired to steal the land base from Telquaa’s traditional territory known as Maxan Lake located near Burns Lake in central BC. It’s only one of many areas within the unceded territories of this province where the DIA, the Feds and Provincial government, in association with Tribal Band Councils peopled by ‘Red Apples’ i.e. groomed residential school victims willing to sell out to government officials for power, prestige and money, have forced her family off their traditional land base in order to reap the rewards of timber and other resource extraction and at the same time destroy their chances at reclaiming what is rightfully their traditional birthright.
Telquaa and Frank’s struggle against such formidable odds represents, both in a graphic and a microcosmic sense, the overall struggle of native peoples everywhere around the world who are facing the same merciless onslaught by the dominant white culture to steal and exploit their traditional lands while at the same time destroying their ancient culture.
Throughout the turbulent, trying and incessantly violent challenges presented by DIA band councils, police and native ‘goon squads’ that have overshadowed and tormented their lives Telquaa and Frank have remained resolute and fearless in their efforts to achieve justice for their people.
Working as they do, within a reality that the majority of British Columbians would find difficult to grasp, it’s not surprising that Telquaa and Frank’s story has gone unnoticed by the status quo, mainstream media. They challenge that status quo perception of native land claims just as the defenders at Gustafsen Lake challenged it in 1995 and the Sun Peaks protesters and the Melvin Creek protesters are challenging it today. And in a similar manner they have faced the harsh and brutal reactionary responses to their work by every segment of the dominant culture including segments of their own native people. Their story is not a romantic one nor is it a subject that decent white folk would wish to discuss around the evening supper table. It’s a story of survival and pain and endless struggle and it’s a story of courage and hope as well.
The Radical would like to thank Telquaa and Frank and their family for the opportunity to speak with them. It’s our hope that their voices, so often stifled and distorted amid the din and glare of bureaucratic red tape and the modern-day glitz that passes for mainstream reporting, can finally be heard.
Our talk begins with Telquaa showing me the marks on her wrists that she claims were a result of the handcuffs which the RCMP put on her two years ago when she and Frank and their family were returning to Canada after a chiefs conference in June of 1998. Telquaa said that the cuffs were purposely applied too tight and left that way for so long that she was left handicapped to the point where it took nearly two years to be able to use her hands properly for writing or doing her artwork.
Radical: So that incident happened in Oliver, B.C.?
Telquaa: Yes, it was about a week after the Chiefs conference from North and South America which met at Keller Place in June of 1998. We went down and did a rally because I do a lot of ‘No Treaty’ rallies even if I have to do them myself because I’m totally against the B.C. Treaty process. While I was there the Chief from my territory was walking towards me and we stopped and looked at each other and I said to her, ‘You, you’re the one that did my whole family in for the land at Maxan Lake.’ She went out the door and started to call the cops on me.
Radical: What Chief was that?
Telquaa: My own Chief, Maureen Ogden. She’s right beside Eddie John all the time every place you go around Burns Lake and Smithers. She would always be with him when they were doing all the deals that were going on. Every time that she’d have a confrontation with me she’d run to Eddie John about it. So Eddie John knows all about my land fight up north. It ended up in the Supreme Court in Smithers. We have all the court papers from that. It all had to do with Maxan Lake, my land, tribal land, my family’s land.
Radical: What was the outcome of that court case?
Telquaa: We ended up going to New York about it, five of us.
Frank: Me and her and the kids drove out to New York city and went to the United Nations. Eddie John was the Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council Chief at the time and Maureen Ogden was working under him in the council office. The RCMP had evicted us off Telquaa’s land at Maxan Lake because we were doing work with the Elders on their traplines. Telquaa’s family had built a big log home at Maxan Lake. Maxan Lake is way up in the bush. That’s her land.
Radical: Where is that in relation to Prince George?
Frank: It’s west of Burns Lake about thirty miles off of the main highway. When the government was making reservations Telquaa’s Grandfather met with the Royal Commission on Indian Affairs and had them set that land aside. We have the minutes of those meetings. What happened was the Tribal Council took the trapline away from Telquaa’s family and signed it over to people on the council.
Radical: How did they manage to get away with that?
Frank: It was all part of the land claims scam that’s been going on for years. What they’re doing is taking away all the Indian names that were part of the old Potlatch system. It’s a big fraud thing that’s going on. They ended up relocating us and forcing us off the reservation. That’s why we’re in the city. Anyhow, we kept going to see the council because we were losing our kids to the ministry of Children & Families. They were being apprehended and then sent down to the Mormon homes in the city and getting abused. That’s why we say that Eddie John’s responsible for child abuse because those kids were physically abused while in these foster homes. We’ve got nieces and nephews who were abused. Our family was the only family from the community who lost children. So we were targeted but we kept confronting the Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council and tried to have them step in and intervene on our behalf and try to help us get our land back. We went to Indian Affairs ourselves. We got all the documents from the Prince George office. We were told to sue Indian Affairs for all of this because none of us are able to live on the reserve except for old Wally who wouldn’t move.
During that time when all the kids were getting taken away one of them pulled up in a limo by our house on Sardis Street in Vancouver. He was just a young kid. He was talking about ‘them’ taking pictures of him doing sex acts and stuff with older men. That same kid they later sent to jail. Most of the kids ended up in jail. Bruce he’s doing seventeen years for a crime he didn’t commit.
Radical: Who’s Bruce?
Frank: Bruce Michell, that’s Telquaa’s nephew. They ended up railroading him in court. That’s what they tried to do to us too, that’s why we ended up going to New York City. After we got evicted we had no place to go so we said, well, let’s drive to the United Nations. We had gotten an invitation from the Coast Salish people in Washington, USA. They invited us to use their NGO status at the United Nations so that we could make a presentation about what was going on with us up there at Maxan Lake with Eddie John and losing our kids and losing our land and losing lives. I say losing lives because there were accidental deaths that weren’t accidents. That’s why I say that Eddie John should be charged with war crimes because what the Tribal Council has done is an act of war against us, especially Telquaa. She is of the Bear Clan and that, in our tradition means a lot.
Telquaa wrote a story that was printed in the Burns Lake newspaper. She told the newspaper that we didn’t need the DIA, that our people were successful in governing themselves. Her dad had a sawmill and he hired all the guys around the community. And her brothers had a small mill too. They made railway ties and other products. But then they contaminated her dad with TB and they contaminated all the men folk and left the women folk….
Radical: When was that?
Telquaa: My father died in 1959. This all took place around the time when Alcan was moving into the area back in 1952 1953. Later on when Eddie John became Chief of the Tribal Council he was involved in making deals with Alcan. He was into logging the traplines too.
Radical: How is Eddie John involved with the logging of the traplines?
Frank: In Fort St. James. He has a big logging outfit, trucks and everything.
Radical: Is this the only instance that you know of where you say Eddie John’s been involved in questionable activities?
Frank: No. Then six million dollars went missing a couple of years ago and the three guys that were involved with Eddie on that ended up drowning in the river. They said it was accidental.
Radical: So all of the guys who were incriminated in that six million dollar scam drowned under mysterious circumstances?
Frank: Yes. And so Eddie John ended up with all these traplines and then they were logged off. When we were back at Maxan Lake we met with all of the old people and talked about their traplines. We had a whole wall covered with maps of the traplines. It covered the whole territory around Maxan Lake.
Telquaa: We should tell Arthur the story about Eddie John’s uncle.
Frank: Oh, Moses Isaac?
Telquaa: Yes. It was during the time that we were going back and forth to court from Vancouver to Smithers. There were many times that we had to go back and forth and show up on short notice. One day we were coming back from court in Smithers and we had another old man with us and we saw this old man just walking down the highway in Vanderhoof. He had a cane and a long trench coat and a cowboy hat on. He was just walking along and so I said, should I pick him up, should I pick him up? And the old man who was with us said, ‘Don’t ever pass an old man. Pick him up.’ And so we stopped to pick him up and he said, ‘No! I don’t want to get in. I’m walking. I’m walking to Prince George.’
Radical: From Vanderhoof?
Telquaa: Yes. He’d already walked from Fort St. James [a distance of over 40 miles. Ed.] and it was another 50 miles to Prince George. He said he was going there because of something to do with Eddie John. ‘He’s a lawyer and he has to help me. This is my last chance. He’s my nephew and I have to deal with him. It has to do with my trapline,’ he said. He was real mad. And so we picked him up and we drove him to Eddie John’s house in Prince George and Eddie John wouldn’t let him in. Wouldn’t open the door for him or nothing. Finally he came back and he says, ‘He won’t even open the door.’ He was after all the logs on his 220 acre trapline out at Ft. St. James and he was just going to log it without even dealing with the old man.
And so Moses Isaac decided that he was going to run and so we drove him down to Vancouver and he stayed with us for a whole week before he decided he was going to go and get his own place downtown. But during the time he stayed with us he was scared for his life because he believed that he was going to get killed for his land, for the logs on his trapline. So after a week we put him up in a hotel downtown. He was fine when we put him in there. Then, the next day when we went to check up on him he was gone. His room was cleaned out. It was just like the old man had disappeared. A few years later I met someone from his area and I asked her if she knew the old man and she freaked. She ran. She wouldn’t even answer me. So I asked another woman who’s last name was Isaac too and she said that he had died. So I don’t know if they did him in or what. No one said anything about it after that.
Radical: So it was just one day later that you went to see him and he was already gone?
Frank: Yes. He was quite an independent sort of person and I knew that if we didn’t put him up that he would run on us so we put him up at the New World Hotel downtown. It was an Indian hotel, owned by Indians.
Radical: So when the old man disappeared then Eddie John would have been able to go in and log off his trapline?
Frank: Yes, that’s what happened. He had already logged off half of it before the old man had gone in to Prince George to see him.
Radical: Do you know where that trapline area was?
Frank: Not exactly but it wouldn’t be hard to find out. The Wildlife Office in Smithers gave us all our papers. Also an Anthropologist at UNBC who was employed by the Gitsan Wet’suwet’en gave us documents that were related to the stealing of all our Indian names and how many … people died. She was a bit hesitant to give them to us but she did.
Radical: How do they steal the names?
Frank: Through the Potlatches. Because the government always has a lot of money to spend and the band chiefs use that money to buy Potlatch names. It is illegal though but they still do it. If they have a real Potlatch put up by the hereditary Chiefs you wouldn’t see any of those guys around. Anyway what they do is they move in people from other reserves and make them band councilors and Chiefs and then they vote to force the original people off their land. That’s what they did in Telquaa’s area and everyone was evicted. Everyone except for Wally. He stuck it out but he lost all his kids to the state. Welfare took them all away. They use the welfare system on our families quite a bit.
Telquaa: And the courts.
Frank: Yes, her sister was threatened a couple times by them but she stood up against them and fought back. Like I mentioned earlier some of our family were railroaded through the courts and are doing long jail terms in prison as a result. That’s the kind of conduct that we’re having to deal with when it comes to the judicial system. There’s a conspiracy between Shirley Meldrum who’s the Federal Crown Prosecutor who was railroading all of us in court. She’s married to Godfrey Sebastian who’s the Indian lawyer….
Telquaa: He was also the Grand Tribal Chief of the Hazelton Gitsan while the land claims were going on up there and we didn’t know that and we were going to see him when we were trying to get help with what was going on in my territory at Maxan Lake. And there he was all along sitting with Maureen Ogden and Eddie John. All these guys were tagging together and we didn’t know all this. So we’re still up against the same bunch.
Frank: Anyway, we brought all of this information to the attention of the United Nations when we went there and we said that there was a conspiracy to eliminate indigenous people from their traditional territories, that they were committing genocide on us by forcing us to leave our land. We told the court that there was a conflict of interest with respect to our case because of this relationship between the Chiefs and Council. We called for a mistrial because of that. How we originally found out was that while it was all taking place this old man who was attending the trial came up to us in court and said did you know that that person is married to so and so. We had Elders come to court with us because we couldn’t afford a lawyer. We were using Indian law which allowed us to do that.
So when we went to New York City we were told that we could come back and wouldn’t be arrested so we returned. We went back to court and asked for a Stay of Proceedings because they didn’t have any evidence and because of this conflict of interest.
Radical: So they were just been giving you the runaround?
Frank: Oh, yes. For example they kept dragging us back and forth to court for four years over a case where they’d charged us with a Break and Entry (B&E) to the Band Office. What happened was we had set up a meeting through Brian Gardiner the local NDP MP to go along with one of the Elders to pick up his social assistance cheque. When we got to the office one of their Indian goons jumped us and then we were charged with starting a fight and B&E.
Radical: So what about Brian Gardiner? Did he come to your defense?
Frank: No, not really. I was kind of hoping that he would but he just ignored us after that which was too bad because I feel we have a strong case and I still want to sue them for putting us through all the legal hassles that came out of the charge.
Radical: Four years of that? Goodness you folks have had enough experience with the legal system that you could probably open your own law firm? (Laugher from all)
Frank: Well, actually we do get a lot of people coming to us to ask for advice.
So when we got back from New York City we went up north to go to court and then came back down to Vancouver afterwards because the Chief had moved into the big log cabin that her sister had built.
Radical: The Chief moved in?
Frank: Yes, they took it off of the land and put it down on her place and now she’s renting it from herself! You should read those transcripts. They’re committing crimes against us. It’s just a kangaroo court. That kind of justice system is not meant for people like us.
Getting back to that Eddie John guy. I’m thinking about all the kids that got taken away from their families. They’re all grown up now eh. They’re at home now, staying with Mary.
Telquaa: They came home on their own.
Frank: After they turn seventeen they just kick them out of the foster homes because they don’t get anymore money for them. There was another young guy, Phillip. In fact Phillip was the one who came to the house in a limo that one time rolling in dough and saying he had a limo driving him around and a hooker and telling us how he was making his money. They were using him in the sex trade. They were renting him out.
Telquaa: The same thing happened with another kid downtown. He saw us getting on the bus and so he jumped on too and told us the same thing about the sex trade.
Radical: I heard a similar story recently related to Jack Webster the former Talk Show host. Apparently he was in a bar one time and someone came in and showed him a photo of a supreme court judge in a very compromising position with a young boy. What incensed Jack so was the fact that he felt that there was nothing he could do about it.
Frank: Yes. Telquaa tried to go to court for those kids and they told her that she couldn’t have them. They said it would be like they were attached to the end of a rocket because she was always fighting for her rights. So they denied her the right to raise those boys. Two of the boys had asked me. These were Tequaa’s nephews, her brother’s kids. He died down here in Vancouver too. They killed him. They said he OD’d [over dosed. Ed.] but I know they killed him. He wouldn’t have OD’d himself. I knew him. I saw him the day before he died. I went there and gave him a quart canning jar of hot moosemeat soup. The next day when I went to visit him they’d cleaned out his room and said he’d OD’d in the washroom. Why would he be in the washroom when he’s got his own room in the hotel? It didn’t make any sense. They said they found him naked in the washroom. I think that they killed him because he was hooked up with M_ P_ M_ P_ and her and Eddie John kinda grew up together and M_ is a heavy drug dealer selling drugs up north. She’s the runner. She owns three houses in the city here. Just from selling shit, you know like crack and cocaine.
Telquaa: And she’s always got a lot of young men and boys traveling around with her too.
Frank: Our friend Donovan got hooked up with her for a little while too. It was hard to get him away from her.
Wolverine phoned us up recently and told us that he liked what he’d heard from us in the paper and on the radio and then he said that we should go down to the resource centre and get a copy of the war crimes act and charge them with genocide. So we went down there. I have a resource worker who dug it up for us and gave us a copy so I’m consider it. What I might have to do is go out to Lethbridge, Alberta and see Russell Barson. He’s an international lawyer. We’d like to get him to represent us in an international court and get the preliminary hearings going at The Hague. We already have the information, we’re already in the door. The lady Nadia who put Telquaa on the website http://www.dialoguebetweennations.com is our in. Anyone can go to that site and read what Telquaa has to say and they can also make comments regarding our inherent rights. [At this point Frank holds up a drawing depicting a flag and then goes on. Ed.] This was the original flag for B.C. It had the four Clan Chiefs in the corners. When some of us went to look at it in the archives in the museum in New Westminster they denied having it. They said it burned up.
Radical: This was a flag that was used before the whites showed up?
Frank: No, this was a flag that they made when B.C. joined Confederation. They sat down with four of the biggest Chiefs in the territories and ten sub-Chiefs. There’s two ledgers with minutes of those meetings. There’s also four staffs and inside those staffs are maps. There’s also ten medals one of which is in Telquaa’s home. Two of the staffs are in the Shuswap and the Okanagan. So all of these things are starting to come together. That’s why we say No Treaties for B.C. because in that original agreement Native people have sixty percent of all the resources of the province. So that’s why they’re covering it up. As Indians we’ve got a big bank roll and they’re spending it on us. So this is why we’re saying that we can charge them for the crimes that they’re committing against all of us.
Radical: So all these negotiating teams that the feds have set up are filled with people who have bought into this big cover-up?
Frank: Those guys that went to the Residential schools were cloned for this particular reason. The federal government employed what they called ‘social scientists’ to condition our people. They advised the government on how to go about stealing our land. They said take them away from their land base, take them away from their culture, take them away from their language and they’ll be a defeated people and while your at it train some of them so that they will say ‘yes’.
When they held that UN Tribunal in Vancouver back in June of 1998 my Dad, Ed Martin, spoke there. He said, ‘I got a son that won’t conform. And he still won’t conform to this day.’ And then he went on about how they were trained in the Residential schools, how they were dictated to. It was just like the military. They altered these guys to a point where they would do whatever they were told. So I think Eddie John and ten other Indian Chiefs and lawyers were given special treatment at UBC when they were getting their degrees. They didn’t fully pass the tests but they arranged it so that now they would have all these puppets to eradicate our history and to take it out by making these treaties.
Treaties are supposed to be between Nations. If we are going to negotiate treaties then they must be between the Queen not the B.C. government or the Canadian government. My great great Grandfather was Mungo Martin. He carved a hundred and twenty foot totem pole, a replica of which sits near the Planetarium in Kitsilano, Vancouver. If you read the placard you realize that he designed that pole so that it has all the clans, representing all our people as Nations, carved in it. He sent this totem pole to the Queen of England so that she would remember all this. To remind her that we have inherent Rights and that we have to be dealt with as separate and sovereign Nations. The pole that’s here is a duplicate of the original one and it was placed here so that the provincial and the federal governments would also remember these things.
Radical: Maybe it’s time that someone brought the politicians down to view it again so that they might understand?
Frank: So that sixty percent (60%) of the province represents a big pot of money and those guys are planning to keep it unless we stand up and challenge them on it. You see ninety-nine percent (99%) of our inherent rights are recognized by practice. If we don’t practice them we’ll never achieve them. Under International Law they say that the perimeters of our territory go as far as the dialect of our language and that’s the land that we’re supposed to hold and protect. Telquaa has a file of all the Indian names and all the families and the different territories which they go with. That’s our evidence. That’s what shows how our local governments looked after ourselves before the arrival of the Europeans. That’s what the federal government and the provincial government are trying to destroy now by using their judicial system and courts and putting the Elders in old age homes and hospitals.
Radical: It’s very much like what I was recently told by Candace Hall who was working for the Sto:lo Nation in the Fraser Valley. She found out that the government was giving vaccines to the Elders in that community and they were dying off at an alarming rate. When she tried to alert the native population to what was going on she was harassed and intimidated to the point where she finally resigned her position. It appears to be just one more way in which the original culture is being wiped out.
Frank: That’s what those guys do. There was a health centre in Prince George that was a branch of the Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council and they did all kinds of stupid things out of that health centre to the people like sterilizing a lot of the women. Now I think it’s an independent body.
Anyhow, one of the reason why Canada is having trouble with signing all these International agreements like NAFTA and the FTAA is that they can’t claim to be a Sovereign country because of all these unsigned treaties that exist here in B.C. So they’re having real problems with that because we’re making noise and saying look we’ve got rights. The truth of the matter is that B.C. is still Indian land whether you like to admit it or not. And even Eddie John knows that but he won’t stand up for his people because he’s been brainwashed like the rest of them. He’s a Catholic too. They’re all Catholics. They’re all products of the Residential schools.
Radical: What do you see as a solution to this problem of having all the Pope’s puppets being in charge making land treaties for native people in this province?
Frank: You know seventy percent of the native people today are youth and I think they should be empowered to have a greater say in what goes on. They know what the problem is.
Telquaa: All of those middle aged people that went to university in the 60s and 70s should all be eliminated from looking after their people because they’re unfit. The young kids have more brains than they do now so they should step aside and give it back to the youth before anything worse happens than what’s already going on now.
Radical: All in all considered I find it amazing that the two of you are still feeling positive about things after all that you’ve been through. Do you have any plans to eventually get out of Vancouver?
Frank: Yes. Our plan is to take back Maxan Lake. They can’t keep us away from there. We want to set up a Longhouse there. A Council house for the kids. The kids have already formed their council for Maxan Lake. We want to do some independent buildings. Build our own homes. Cob houses and stuff. Many of us are artists and we’ve got plans to market our work on the net. We want to set it up so that we can work with the youth who’ve been taken away from their culture by the current system. It will be a place of healing for all these kids who grew up in foster homes and now are looking at regaining their cultural heritage.
Radical: That sounds like it would be a wonderful thing to have happen.
I thank you both for sharing some of your concerns with The Radical. I know that there is much more that we didn’t get into in any detail but what you’ve told us I think is very valuable to a correct understanding of what’s been going on in this province as far as the land title issue is concerned. I wish you both the best and look forward to working with you in the future.
————-
(Anyone wishing to contact Frank or Telquaa can do so by contacting helen michell [email protected] or The Radical at [email protected] )

A monstrous crime is being committed in Ukraine right before the eyes of the world and the western media is helping to cover it up and distract the attention of the entire world from the core fact that the events in Ukraine are not a popular uprising but a carefully orchestrated synthetic coup d’état brought about by long entrenched western color revolution infrastructure that was installed by US/NATO/EU to bring about the illegal act of regime change on the sovereign country of Ukraine.
The unprecedented violent actions by the armed insurgents, who openly use deadly force on law enforcement and have set Kiev in flames, attempting to overthrow the government by force, are in fact treasonous crimes against the Ukraine and the people of Ukraine as they are being controlled from the outside and violate all internationally accepted democratic principles as well as all of the internal laws and constitutionally dictated standards of conduct enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine.
It is illegal under international law for any country to carry out measures to bring about the illegal change of the government in any other sovereign state, this includes support of any kind for insurgent forces, the implementation of economic and other measures to pressure the government to step down or dissolve and all other instruments and measures both covert and overt that may be used to bring about what is now popularly called ‘regime change’ by the West and the US Government.
International Law
Overthrowing governments and removing presidents by force is illegal and covered in laws and ruling by bodies such as the World Court and even the International Criminal Court, which has become a mere instrument of the West, however the United Nations Charter is the most important document and widely respected of all of these instruments and one which all countries that attempt to abide by international law attempt to follow.
Under the UN Charter all attempts by the US/NATO/EU to influence the events in Ukraine so as to bring about a resolution that conforms to their own interests are illegal.
The debate over US/NATO/EU meddling in Ukraine and the use of US/NATO/EU military force, economic measures, political pressure and all of the other ‘tools’ they use, including aggressive military attack and occupation, to effect regime changes in countries such as Afghanistan, Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Serbia, Venezuela, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Sudan and the other targeted countries, has conveniently been absent of one key fact: coercive, forced and outside regime change violates basically all of the accepted tenets of international law.
UN Charter
According to Article 1 (2) of the UN Charter developing peaceful international relations based on the ‘principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples’ is one of the founding principles of the United Nations, and by default the UN Security Council. Therefore any attempt by any country to subjugate or pressure another into implementing measures or carrying out an agenda not instigated from within and not in keeping with the will of the people is illegal. The ‘will of the people’ can only be known through referendums and democratic political processes and debates, not through fabricated pogroms in the streets, which the US is expert at organizing. As for pressure on the government, even the implementation of sanctions is therefore illegal as this is done to pressure a government from the outside.
It is prohibited under international law to threaten to use force and Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter states this clearly and requires all UN member states to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of other states. US/NATO/EU have not threatened military force against Ukraine, as they already have their ground force installed as they did in Syria, Libya, etc. but this applies to other countries they have invaded recently.
Article 2 (7) of the UN Charter states clearly that the United Nations and its members have no authority to intervene in matters which are within the domestic jurisdiction of any state (sovereign country). However the US/NATO/EU have gotten around this by implementing and using what they call the Responsibility to Protect. Uprisings and violent demonstrations such as what is happening in Ukraine fall within the definition of domestic jurisdiction, therefore any outside attempt to interfere is illegal.
Armed Insurgents
What is alarming in Ukraine is the violent and militarized nature of what the West is endlessly painting as a legitimate opposition. This portrayal runs contrary to what the most of the world is seeing right in front of their eyes on their TV screens. Even multiple statements by US officials themselves and a recently released telephone conversation between US official Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, show that these are not members of a legitimate internal opposition, but rather radicalized, militarized, trained, planted, funded and supported members of western ‘color revolution’ infrastructure.
The US/NATO/EU continue to egregiously blame the government and are criminally silent when the opposition they support, and in fact planted, murder members of the security forces and policemen. The outright murder, kidnapping and extreme violence against police and security forces should be something that would cause an outcry among police officers worldwide, especially in the US, where their police are given almost god-like reverence, yet the so called ‘international community’ and members of the world’s law enforcement bodies are silent.
Nothing that the insurgents have done would be supported in any US/NATO/EU country or city, yet they continue to call on, threaten and pressure the authorities in Ukraine to not interfere or take required measures. The violent insurgents have made a mockery of law and order and have literally set the capital of a civilized, democratic European country on fire.
Storming, seizing and burning down the buildings which house the instruments and bodies of the state; openly shooting, murdering, kidnapping and falsely detaining members of law enforcement; destroying and setting alight the property of the state and the people; organizing the pogrom we are seeing in Ukraine; violating the law and acting against their own constitution; blackmailing and threatening officials to step down or be compliant and finally promoting policies that are not in keeping with the desires of the Ukrainian people, are all factual aspects of the Ukrainian ‘opposition’. So why is US/NATO/EU openly supporting them?
Business As Usual for US/NATO/EU
In my journalistic work I have attempted to robustly detail for years what US/NATO have been doing in their redesigning of the world’s geopolitical landscape and I cannot repeat this enough, what we are seeing in Ukraine is just another regime change for the West. The tactics they use are always the same, we have seen them and documented them time and again and they continue to be illegal and egregious. Yet they continue with impunity.
All of the regime change actions and provocations that US/NATO/EU have used in Ukraine have been documented and exposed before the fact, yet the US president, EU leaders and their compliant media continue to egregiously stick to their own artificial pre-planned narrative.
The goal was regime change because US/NATO/EU understood that the Ukrainian Government and more importantly the Ukrainian people would not allow their country to be subverted and become yet another US/NATO/EU client state. More importantly this turn to Russia seriously interferes with US/NATO/EU military plans to base US/NATO missiles in Ukraine, evict the Russian Black Sea Fleet and achieve their prime military objective of neutralizing Russia and eliminating Russia’s response to a first strike nuclear attack, which at the end of the day is the goal. The people of Ukraine and the organs of government are just inconveniences for US/NATO/EU and even if the country is completely destroyed and divided, their goal will be carried out. The destruction of the state of Ukraine will in fact benefit the US/NATO/EU and this fact we have seen repeatedly in the last 15 years.
Obama Connects Syria and Ukraine
In comments related to a soon to be released Voice of Russia interview Professor Francis Boyle a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law told me the following: ‘Obama said that the people of the Ukraine should be able to determine their own future just like the people of Syria should be able to determine their own future. So Obama himself linked the two. The strategy is the same: regime change, civil war, destruction of the State. So this elevates the call by the State Department for a transition to a government of technocrats to the presidential level. The cat is out of the bag. Regime Change of the democratically elected government of Ukraine is openly admitted to be USG policy. Even worse than Syria, whose government was arguably not really democratic. Nevertheless as I point out in my book, the demand for regime change by one government against another government is illegal and violates the World Court’s ruling against the United States in the Nicaragua decision (1996).’
Media Failure
The western mass media continues to promote and spread a phony slanted narrative of the events in Ukraine and their attempts have been formidable and almost impossible to counter. This concerns mostly the nature and portrayal of the police murdering opposition which, like the cop killers in the Caucuses, the West portrays as heroes and some sort of freedom fighters.
Again the hypocrisy of the West in Ukraine is resounding and completely obvious, yet they continue with impunity. US illegality and their complete and total disregard for international law continue to stare the world in the face in Guantanamo and worldwide, yet the compliant media has failed as US illegality has now spread like a cancer to include all NATO/EU countries.
It is another black day for the world as we see that the mass media has completely failed and been corrupted in the West. All of the facts surrounding the murderous insurgents in Ukraine and their bloody uprising and the collusion of the Central Intelligence Agency, US/NATO/EU and the West are being conveniently ignored as the subservient media chooses to attempt to go so far as to blame Russia which has from day one made it a point not to interfere.
Nowhere do we see debates going on regarding: the over $50 billion the US has spent buying out Ukraine; the admission by Victoria Nuland of US meddling in her telephone conversation, during which she implicated the head of the UN in US/NATO/EU plans; the training and equipping of the insurgents by US/NATO/EU; the fact that all outside pressure and meddling is illegal nor the fact that if anything similar happened in the West it would in no way be allowed.
Wake Up Call
They have won and Ukraine has fallen. The President of Ukraine has stated he will step down, which was the first call by the US/NATO/EU, when the first encampments appeared on Maidan Square. This was their clear goal and even though we documented it they have won. However what they have in fact done is committed another crime on an international scale.
Will anyone answer for the crime of subversion and for violating the sovereignty of Ukraine? Not likely. Therefore this should be a serious wake up call to all countries of the world, but will it? Also not likely.
What is striking in Ukraine was that it was a democratically elected government, that all of the US/NATO/EU plans were know from the start and that it was still allowed to proceed.
Once again, as we saw in Iraq, Libya and all other countries where the governments have been recently overthrown and the leader executed or otherwise removed (with North Korea being the perfect example) the only protection that any country has from the imposition of US/NATO/EU regime change is quite simply nuclear weapons.
US/NATO Obama/Neo-Con Plans and Impunity
After 9-11 Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz, the then US Deputy Secretary of Defense stated that the US Government is now in the business of destroying countries, executing presidents and changing governments at will.
General Wesley Clark who was the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, took issue with the Neo-Con architects from the Project for a New American Century (LINK 5) and gave testimony that the US planned to overthrow seven countries after 9/11: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
Mr. Clark called the post 9-11 overtaking of the US Government a coup and said it was plotted by Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and ‘a half dozen other collaborators from the Project for the New American Century’. In a report Glen Greenwald cites a US Secretary of Defense Memo which gave even more detail and put a timeframe on the plan: ‘I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office. It says we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.’
Greenwald reported that General Clark was shocked and wrote about the following exchange: ‘And we’ve got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes Syria, Iran [sic], Iraq before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us.’ Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: ‘the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?’.’ Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: ‘the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?’
A New Regime Would Be Illegal
Any regime installed in any way other than trough democratic elections in Ukraine and under the current crisis will be illegal. President Yanukovich despite being weak and some might argue incompetent in maintaining stability in his country, was democratically elected in elections that were recognized by the entire world. This is important to underline.
Even though he was placed in a Catch 22 situation by the West where if he cracked down he would be demonized and if he did not he would be overthrown, his handling of the internal crisis leaves a lot of questions to be answered.
Timing of Ukrainian Coup
It is also important to note the similarities between the timing of the events in Ukraine and the invasion by Georgia of South OssetiaBoth taking place during Olympics and again the words of Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz: ‘… we’ve got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us.’
Ukraine is the crowning jewel and it looks like they will obtain it.
The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at [email protected].

That may seem a strange title for an article about our legal system, but after reading about Campbell Ernest Crichton, the former Duncan, BC, physiotherapist who faces charges he sexually assaulted at least 23 of his former patients, it seems to be the correct title.
A February 21, 2014, article in The Province started thus:
A hearing has been ordered in the case of a former physiotherapist who successfully argued he was too poor to pay for a lawyer to defend himself against charges he sexually assaulted 23 female patients.
Last year Campbell Ernest Crichton of Duncan, B.C., had his charges temporarily set aside after a judge found he was indigent and needed a government-funded lawyer for the complex criminal trial.
Anyone following my writings on Freedom of Speech will be well familiar with the case of Arthur Topham, the Quesnel, BC, publisher of RadicalPress.com, an alternative news website.
Mr. Topham currently faces criminal charges under Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada for ‘inciting hatred’ against an identifiable group.
What, you ask, is the connection between Arthur Topham’s Freedom of Speech case and an [alleged] degenerate serial sex offender?
Quite simply, neither man can afford legal counsel for their criminal trials.
In the case of the [alleged] sex offender B.C. Supreme Court Justice Keith Bracken said there was a ‘real and substantial’ risk to Crichton’s right to a fair trial if if did not have legal counsel. As a result of that ‘real and substantial’ risk Justice Bracken ordered Crichton be provided a government-funded lawyer.
Arthur Topham is facing criminal charges for exercising his Right to Freedom of Speech. There is no ‘victim’ here other than a few people whose actions lead me to believe they self-identify as victims. Topham sexually assaulted nobody. He physically harmed nobody. He never forced a single person on Planet Earth to read what he wrote.
Despite those facts Arthur Topham’s right to a fair trial with adequate legal counsel seems unimportant to the very same judiciary that ruled an [alleged] serial sex offender ought to have a government-funded lawyer.
Arthur Topham is not a wealthy man. He’s a modest man living on modest means in his rural home outside of Quesnel, BC. His application for legal aid was denied. His application for government funding under what is known as a Rowbotham Application was similarly denied.
By these standards it is far more important that a sexual deviant’s rights be safeguarded than a man who dared write a few words someone found objectionable.
That is a very dangerous precedent to set.
Sending a man to prison for the words he writes ought to scare the crap out of every single writer in Canada. Sure, today it’s Topham’s views that are ‘politically incorrect’ and therefore fair game for our legal system, but what about tomorrow? Whose views will be deemed ‘incorrect’ then? Who will stand up for you then?
Campbell Ernest Crichton is charged with sexually abusing 23 human beings. That is real, substantial physical and emotional trauma all for one sick man’s own sexual gratification.
There are real human victims.
Arthur Topham wrote an article someone didn’t like. For that the BC Hate Crimes Unit of the RCMP and the BC Attorney General want to send Mr. Topham to prison, while refusing him any chance of a true legal defense.
Shouldn’t we be far more concerned about sexual predators? Nope. We’ll happily pay their legal fees and send that darned writer to prison. After all, ideas are far more dangerous than sexual predators, right?

[Editor’s Note:
The first thing that comes to mind when I think of Ezra Levant is the word hypocrite. A self-chosen champion of ‘freedom of speech’ this big mouthed bigot loves telling his dumbed down goy followers how he’s fighting for their right to free expression while all the while he’s suckering them in for donations to cover his court costs incurred by his own vicious acts against Canada’s Muslim community that have gotten him in the legal hot water he’s now stewing in.
Just like his Zionist cohorts in the Zionist controlled news media Levant has spent years spewing forth his hatred toward the Muslims following the old, worn-out agenda of Israel to get the Christian nations of the west battling with the Arab nations of the Middle East so the Jews themselves can sit back and rake in the money spent on armaments and military loans and watch the stupid goy murder each other out of ignorance.
This is the same bigot who, when the Crown finally laid charges against me for ‘promoting hatred against people of the Jewish faith’ back in November of 2012, rather than defend my freedom to express my opinions on political issues here in Canada, chose instead to vilify my name and my work on the Sun News Network by libelling and defaming my person and spouting off all sorts of blatant lies about me on a media reaching around the globe.
Now that he’s been caught up in his own web of lies and deception and he finds himself in the legal hot seat he’s crying the blues and asking Canadians to stand by him and support him and pay his bills so that he’ll be able to continue shooting his yap off on tv and calling down the Muslims and the Indians and the rest of Canadians who happen to stand in the way of these psychopaths getting their way in whatever criminal action they choose.
Here is a prime example of his bigoted brain at work. On his please help poor me blogsite Levant posts the following notice about the person who’s taking him to court, accusing him of practising ‘the soft jihad of ‘lawfare’, which he defines as ‘the abusive practice where lawsuits are filed against critics of radical Islam just to harass them and silence them….’
Screen Shot 2014-02-23 at 12.05.15 AM
Just stop for a moment and think about that. This is precisely what the Zionist Jew lobby groups here in Canada have been doing against their fellow Canadians for the past sixty years now. It’s been lawsuit after lawsuit laid against Canadians who’ve been critical of the racist, apartheid, criminal actions of the supremacist state of Israel and never once did we see Levant or any of his fellow Jew bigots ever stand up for these people. Never. In fact the Jew lobby groups like B’nai Brith Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress and now the newly formed treasonous organization the Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs are the major antagonists involved in trying to shut up the whole goddam country so that only they will be able to lie and cheat and deceive the country into doing whatever they decide we, the people, ought to do for them.
Then this brash psycho bigot attempts to convince the gullible people of Canada that he’s being ‘targeted’ because of his last seven years fighting for ‘freedom of speech’ and now he needs their help when in truth, he’s spent the last seven years and longer calling down and abusing and slandering the real freedom fighters here in Canada like the late Doug Christie and Ernst Zundel and Doug Collins and the many other non-Jew individual bloggers and publishers and writers who’ve been abused and jailed by the likes of these two-faced duel-citizen Jew lobbyists who only have their home and native land of Israel in mind whenever they attempt to take away the rights of normal Canadians such as myself. It’s these very same Jew organizations that have been on my ass for the past seven years and when did we ever see or hear the bigot Levant take a stand on my behalf? Never. Whenever my case did come up it was always Levant who was the first to sling the old bullshit epithets of the Zionists my way, calling me an ‘anti-Semite’ and a ‘Jew-hater’, etc. Now he acts like he’s been the advocate of everyone here in Canada and fighting for all our rights.
Screen Shot 2014-02-23 at 12.06.39 AM
The big mouthed bigot has now come out with a newsletter that he’s sending out to all of those who he’s duped into believing that he’s going to be Canada’s shining knight and save us all from the censors. He’s calling it, ‘Fighting for Freedom’. Below you’ll see what I’m calling it in my parody of his first edition.]
Red spacer copy
EzraFF800 copy
Screen Shot 2014-02-22 at 5.27.14 PM
Welcome to the first edition of ‘Fighting for Zion’ — my weekly newsletter! I’m using the e-mail address that someone said you once typed into a website similar to mine requesting to be signed up for just such a newsletter. If you don’t want to be on the list too bad, it won’t hurt my feelings as I’m used to blurting out all sorts of bullshit spam propaganda on the Sun News Network and on my own anti-Muslim/First Nations/Goyim hate show, ‘The Source’ where I get to open my gaping flap-trap and call anyone and everyone down who may happen to be standing in the way of the Rothschild-controlled Zionist agenda for global take-over.
Of course that means ANYTHING that one of the cattle (i.e. ‘goyim’ or non-Jew), happens to say which we can then use our Zionist controlled mainstream media to begin a smear campaign against so the rest of the herd of gullible Canadian goyim will start to see them them as either a ‘terrorist’ or a ‘racist’ or a ‘hate monger’ or a ‘wing-nut’ or an ‘anti-Semite’ or a ‘neo-Nazi’ or a ‘white supremacist’ or ‘Jew-baiter’ or…Jehovah forbid… a ‘holocaust denier’ and a blatant committer of ‘hate crimes’ and cringe in fear lest they also be accused!
But I hope you do stay subscribed because if you click ‘unsubscribe’ on the link at the bottom it won’t work anyway and actually just adds your email to our list in Tel Aviv that my Mossad Jew controllers keep so they know precisely who it is that doesn’t wish to be a part of our glorious Jew World Order that we’ve been working so hard on now for the past couple of thousand years to achieve.
Once a week I’ll send you my favourite Sun newspaper pro-Zionist, praise Israel, praise Harper and bomb and kill the Palestinian kids columns plus a few of the most interesting videos from my TV show on the Scum News Network!
Speaking of my TV show I’m particularly proud of the one where I interviewed the late neo-Nazi, Zundel-loving, ‘Free Speech’ lawyer Doug Christie just four months prior to his timely demise in March of 2013. I got to bad-mouth, lie, libel and slander that anti-Semite and Jew hating holocaust denier Arthur Topham who lives out in British Columbia and runs a ‘hate propaganda’ site called www.RadicalPress.com. Of course he’s not alone out there as I know there are millions of other Jew-haters and Anarchists and neo-Nazis and Indian lovers and rednecks living out there who would just love to get their hands on God’s chosen ones and cram us all back into the ovens again but he was one of the more difficult to catch.
Screen Shot 2014-02-22 at 4.55.45 PM
We first tried back in 2007 when another of my fat, loud-mouthed friends from Victoria, B.C. (who works for the occult masonic covenant false front Jew lobby B’nai Brith Canada), used the now repealed Sec. 13(1) ‘hate crime’ legislation that we’d slipped in to the Canadian Human Rights Code to get the Canadian Human Rights Commission to find him guilty and take down his website. But before it was able to all play out we found that Sec. 13(1) wasn’t all it was deviously made out to be and the Muslim terrorists here in Canada finally figured out a way to use it against us! Can you imagine that? Such chutzpah on their part to think that one of our very own specially created ‘hate crime’ laws that we’d spent decades designing in order to censor and control the bleating of the sheep on the Internet here in Canada could be used agains US. That’s why we told Harper to get rid of it because then we’d be able to have the media all to ourselves (as we already do) and we could carry on brainwashing the dumbed down Canucks into believing whatever lies we decided to tell them just like we’ve always done.
Now of course all we have left in our arsenal of lies and dirty tricks is Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada which deals with ‘Hate Propaganda’. That was another law that we were able to pressure the gullible goyim politicians into putting in federal legislation. The only problem is it takes a lot more work to get a conviction because the cattle actually have recourse to certain self-defences which are built into the legislation and the pesky matter of ‘Truth’ is still actually a defence yet, unlike what we had with the Sec. 13(1) weapon.
Our only real hope now is to use our Zionist controlled courts and judges and lawyers who have all sworn allegiance to our Rothschild-created ‘Crown’ in the City of London, England aka Regina (Queen Elizabeth II) to carry on a protracted, expensive, onerous process of endless court appearances and phoney bail conditions that will tend to wear down our victims to the point where they either go broke and give up, flee the country or freak out and do something that we can then use to justify sending our mercenary RCMP forces to liquidating them with a bullet in the back of the head. That, of course, is our preferred method of controlling the goyim. It worked so well for us during our reign of terror in Russia but nowadays we have to be a bit more careful about using those old tried and true techniques and we only do so in dire circumstances like in the case of Greg Matters up in central B.C. where we had to stop him from exposing our links to pedophilia and murder and the crimes we committed in Bosnia.
Occasionally, I’ll also send you updates on other fights — like my upcoming Zionist Hate speech trial, that starts in Toronto on March 3rd. You can read about that at www.LieWithEzra.ca and while you’re there send me some big bucks so I don’t have to borrow the money from my fellow Zionists or spend any of my own earnings. The goyim are traditionally our cash cow (no pun intended of course) so let’s not break with these long standing customs. Why just ask the Germans how it works. They’ve been paying us billions of dollars in reparations for the past eighty years for a crime that never happened so I’m sure you Canadians can cough up a few shekels too in order to help out a poor, downtrodden Jew lawyer who’s being threatened with an economic pogrom by a raving Arab infidel who wants me to stop spreading lies about him and his faith.
Enjoy the newsletter — and keep watching the Zionist controlled Big Brother TV!
Yours for a Greater Israel and Internet Censorship for all Goyim,
Ezra Levant
Fighting For Zion

By Marc Bennetts Special to The Washington Times
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
MOSCOW — At the height of the Cold War, it was common for American conservatives to label the officially atheist Soviet Union a ‘godless nation.’
More than two decades on, history has come full circle, as the Kremlin and its allies in the Russian Orthodox Church hurl the same allegation at the West.
‘Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values,’ Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a recent keynote speech. ‘Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan. This is the path to degradation.’
In his state of the nation address in mid-December, Mr. Putin also portrayed Russia as a staunch defender of ‘traditional values’ against what he depicted as the morally bankrupt West. Social and religious conservatism, the former KGB officer insisted, is the only way to prevent the world from slipping into ‘chaotic darkness.’
As part of this defense of ‘Christian values,’ Russia has adopted a law banning ‘homosexual propaganda’ and another that makes it a criminal offense to ‘insult’ the religious sensibilities of believers.
The law on religious sensibilities was adopted in the wake of a protest in Moscow’s largest cathedral by a female punk rock group against the Orthodox Church’s support of Mr. Putin. Kremlin-run television said the group’s ‘demonic’ protest was funded by ‘some Americans.’
Mr. Putin’s views of the West were echoed this month by Patriarch Kirill I of Moscow, the leader of the Orthodox Church, who accused Western countries of engaging in the ‘spiritual disarmament’ of their people.
In particular, Patriarch Kirill criticized laws in several European countries that prevent believers from displaying religious symbols, including crosses on necklaces, at work.
‘The general political direction of the [Western political] elite bears, without doubt, an anti-Christian and anti-religious character,’ the patriarch said in comments aired on state-controlled television.
‘We have been through an epoch of atheism, and we know what it is to live without God,’ Patriarch Kirill said. ‘We want to shout to the whole world, ‘Stop!’’
Other figures within the Orthodox Church have gone further in criticizing the West. Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, a church spokesman, suggested that the modern-day West is no better for a Christian believer than the Soviet Union.
Soviet authorities executed some 200,000 clergy and believers from 1917 to 1937, according to a 1995 presidential committee report. Thousands of churches were destroyed, and those that survived were turned into warehouses, garages or museums of atheism.
‘The separation of the secular and the religious is a fatal mistake by the West,’ the Rev. Chaplin said. ‘It is a monstrous phenomenon that has occurred only in Western civilization and will kill the West, both politically and morally.’
The Kremlin’s encouragement of traditional values has sparked a rise in Orthodox vigilantism. Fringe groups such as the Union of Orthodox Banner Bearers, an ultraconservative movement whose slogan is ‘Orthodoxy or Death,’ are gaining prominence.
Patriarch Kirill has honored the group’s leader, openly anti-Semitic monarchist Leonid Simonovich, for his services to the Orthodox Church. The Banner Bearers, who dress in black paramilitary uniforms festooned with skulls, regularly confront gay and liberal activists on the streets of Moscow.
Although Mr. Putin has never made a secret of what he says is his deep Christian faith, his first decade in power was largely free of overtly religious rhetoric. Little or no attempt was made to impose a set of values on Russians or lecture to the West on morals.
However, since his inauguration for a third presidential term in May 2012, the increasingly authoritarian leader has sought to reach out to Russia’s conservative, xenophobic heartland for support.
It has proved a rich hunting ground.
‘Western values, from liberalism to the recognition of the rights of sexual minorities, from Catholicism and Protestantism to comfortable jails for murderers, provoke in us suspicion, astonishment and alienation,’ Yevgeny Bazhanov, rector of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s diplomatic academy, wrote in a recent essay.
Analysts suggest that Mr. Putin’s shift to ultraconservatism and anti-West rhetoric was triggered by mass protests against his rule that rocked Russia in 2011 and 2012. The unprecedented show of dissent was led mainly by educated, urban Muscovites — many with undisguised pro-Western sympathies.
‘This is the government’s response to modernized Russians becoming more defiant and independent,’ said Maria Lipman, an analyst with the Moscow-based Carnegie Center. ‘The government is pitting the conservative majority against the liberal minority. As a result, raging anti-Western ideology has now turned into something that is almost a state ideology.’
Ms. Lipman, however, suggested that Mr. Putin may be wary of expressing too much support for the Orthodox Church — ‘a symbol of Russian statehood’ — lest it someday challenge his authority.
Some 70 percent of Russians define themselves as Orthodox Christians in opinion polls, and opposition figures in the past have called on the church to play a mediating role between the Kremlin and protesters.
‘Because of Putin’s shift to conservatism, the church may feel more emboldened,’ Ms. Lipman said. ‘So Putin does not overemphasize the church in speeches, preferring to concentrate on talk of traditional values. He is wary of boosting its support even higher.’

Dear Free Speech Advocates and Radical Press Supporters,
Due to the nature of this particular Legal Update, i.e., it being recent events connected to my Preliminary Inquiry, the necessity arose for editorial commentary throughout the report wherever I felt it was warranted. It also meant that it would be a rather long article as well. The need to present a general overview of my case now that it’s finally reached this stage is the reason for its inordinate length.
January 22nd, 2014 marked the 616th day since my arrest on May 16th, 2012 for the alleged crime of ‘communicating statements, other than in private conversation, [that] willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin, contrary to Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code.’ The actual section of the Criminal Code of Canada reads:
Wilful promotion of hatred

(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
In the Legal Rights section of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, under ‘Proceedings in criminal and penal matters’, 11(b) it states:
11. Any person charged with an offence has the right
(b) to be tried within a reasonable time;
According to the stated legal rights of all Canadian citizens (as denoted in the above Section 11(b) of the Charter), one must assume that a wait of 616 days or 20 months plus should be construed as being a ‘reasonable time’ in which to expect one’s case to be heard in a Canadian court of law. But of course 616 days is only the beginning of the arduous process of seeking justice within the Canadian court system. January 22nd, 2014 was not the day when my trial on these specious charges was set to commence; it was but the date set for the Preliminary Inquiry which is basically an opportunity afforded the accused wherein they are given an opportunity to dispute the actual evidence which precipitated the laying of charges based on the Crown’s allegations.
I will get to the actual proceedings but first I’d like to say a few words about this section of the Canadian Criminal Code (CCC) which is placed under the heading ‘Hate Propaganda’ and exists as Sections 318(1) through to Section 320.1(1) of the Code itself. This vile, undemocratic section of the Criminal Code was inserted into law by Zionist forces operating within the Cohen Commission back in 1970 and remains the one critical section of Canada’s criminal code where the pro-Zionist elements within Canada specifically the Jewish lobby organizations such as B’nai Brith Canada (BBC), the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), the Simon Wiesenthal Centre (SWC) and the most recently formed Jewish umbrella organization, the Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs (CIJA) are now focusing their combined effort in a last ditch, desperate legal campaign designed to censor and silence Canada’s Internet and prevent Freedom of Speech from occurring without fear of legal reprisals.
When the Zionist’s previous weapon of mass deception/censorship, i.e., Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, was repealed by the Parliament of Canada back on June 25th, 2012 there was already a frantic movement afoot to find some new legal avenue with which to threaten and intimidate Canadian citizens into fearing to publish and express on the Internet their opinions or ideas or the opinions and ideas of others on any matter pertaining to this particular element within Canadian society (the Jews comprising less that 2% of Canada’s total population). Having their tentacles firmly entwined throughout the federal judiciary the Jewish lobbyists, led by the likes of former Liberal Attorney General of Canada and staunch Zionist Irwin Cotler, were working overtime behind the scenes in order to formulate new policies within the Harper Conservative government; measures that would ensure that their Number One weapon HATE would continue to find a place of honour and litigation within Canada’s legal system and be available to this minority group to use in their ongoing promotion and defence of the Apartheid, Racist, Supremacist State of Israel and the promulgation of its contemptible political ideology known as Zionism.
Until Canada is free of all this Zionist Jew created ‘HATE’ legislation we will never be able to say that we’re a democratic nation that values the one fundamental God-given right that must remain sacrosanct in order to retain all of our other inherent rights, that being the right to free and unfettered expression. All of it must be eliminated so that a level playing field will exist for every Canadian.
EndHateCrimeLegislation 2
The Preliminary Inquiry Day One
Back in November of 2013 the date, January 22nd, 2014, was set for a full day to hold a preliminary inquiry into my Sec. 319(2) ‘hate crime’ case involving the two complainants B’nai Brith Canada (represented by Agent Z) and Ricardo Warmouse, a lawyer involved in numerous former Sec. 13 cases prior to the law’s repeal in June of 2012. My former lawyer, Doug Christie, had requested that at least one week of time be set aside for the preliminary inquiry in order to challenge all the specious evidence that Crown had used in order to gain its illegal search warrant then used to invade my residence and steal all my computers and electronic files plus other hard copy materials which weren’t covered in the warrant. Crown at that time agreed to four days.
After the passing of Mr. Christie in March of 2013 Crown Counsel Jennifer Johnston changed that time period to one day, telling the judge that in her estimation a single day was all the time necessary for Crown to as Crown and Judge Morgan have been wont to say repeatedly, ‘pass the Shepherd test’ and move the case on to the trial stage. The ‘Shephard Test‘, for those not versed in court legalese involved an extradition case back in the 1970’s out of which emerged a number of test arguments as to the degree of evidence required in order for a judge to determine whether or not to move the case forward.
Being self-represented and unaware of the machinations of Crown I ended up with one day in order to address all the issues including the sworn information of Cst. Normandie Levas provided to a Justice of the Peace in order to have the search warrant approved; information that contained numerous allegations which appeared to have been written by a Zionist script writer rather than by someone who was at the time relatively new to the controversial BC HATE CRIME TEAM and not versed in the whole array of research necessary to make expert commentary on issues dealing with what may or may not be alleged to be ‘hate’ literature. All these allegations initially sworn in the Information regarding postings on the RadicalPress.com website were basically the same evidence that Crown was now introducing at the preliminary inquiry in order to convince Judge Morgan that there was sufficient evidence to commit my case to trial.
Initially Crown was planning to call a number of witnesses for the preliminary inquiry, the bulk of them being RCMP officers involved in the surveillance and later plunder of my home and theft of my computers and electronic files and firearms. The others were Barry Salt an expert in the field of forensic examination of computers and data and, of course, Det.Cst. Terry Wilson, the Lead Investigator for the BC HATE CRIME TEAM located in Surrey, B.C. I had made application to the court to have the judge order Crown to subpoena the other crucial witnesses the two complainants who had filed the vexatious complaints in the first place and Cst. Normandie Levas, the second member of the BC HATE CRIME TEAM who, as the Affiant swearing the Information, was responsible for the act that led to the granting of the illegal search warrant used to enter my home and steal all of my computer equipment and firearms. Judge Morgan did eventually direct Crown to have Cst. Levas appear but as she was on ‘holidays’ at the time of the scheduled inquiry a later date of March 13th, 2014 was set for cross-examination.
NewWilsonPhoto
During an earlier focus hearing on January 3rd, 2014 Judge Morgan mediated some concessions between Crown and myself, which I agreed to, regarding some of the witnesses being called in order to prove where I lived and what firearms I had in my possessions and so on; items that would cut down the time which would otherwise have been wasted giving evidence for incidental aspects of the case that I wasn’t intending to challenge. As a concession to this Crown agreed to reconsider the second firearms count involving unsafe storage.At the time, I informed Judge Morgan that I recently had taken the PAL firearms safety course and received 100% of the written test and 90% on the practical test and was now in the process of sending my application off. I also informed Judge Morgan that I was planning to purchase a certified gun storage locker in which to store my firearms properly. Crown then stated that if these preconditions were achieved that they would consider staying the firearms charge.
What was scheduled to be a one day inquiry, like all great plans of mice and men, turned out to be a horse of another colour. I had made arrangements with my two witnesses, Mr. Frank Frost and Mr. Lonnie Landrud, to be at the courthouse at 9:30 a.m. on the morning of Wednesday, January 22nd. When my wife and I arrived around 9:15 a.m. it was evident that my case was not going to be the only one scheduled for the morning. Now this is not an uncommon occurrence in the Quesnel Courthouse (or in many other smaller communities throughout B.C.) and it all stems from government ineptitude (or design?) that there are never enough judges and prosecutors and courtrooms available to handle the volume of cases awaiting address. Nonetheless, I did expect that for a formal preliminary inquiry time would have been arranged so that it could occur without needless interruption.
After approximately twenty minutes of lawyers and Crown attempting to reschedule times, etc. my case began and Crown called their first witness, Det. Cst. Terry Wilson, lead investigator for the BC HATE CRIME TEAM. Det. Wilson informed the court as to his name and position within the RCMP and when Crown asked him about his involvement with RadicalPress.com he told the court that he been monitoring the RadicalPress.com website since April 28th, 2011. It was on that date he first received an email from Ricardo Warmouse who registered a Sec. 319(2) ‘hate crime’ complaint against the site. I thought it was rather amusing given that it was right around the time of the last federal election (May 2nd, 2011) and I had just posted a long article on Harper only the day before on April 27th which I had titled ‘Hating Harper‘. It’s possible that Warmouse didn’t appreciate the graphic header for the piece in question that caused him to lay the charge or it may have been my advice at the time to the Canadian electorate warning them of dire days ahead should Canadians hand Stephen Harper a mandate to govern the nation. Whatever it was, given the current controversy over Harper and his entourage of Zionist sycophant ministers and pro-Israeli band of Chabad Lubavicher controllers traveling at great taxpayer expense to the apartheid state of Israel and soiling Canada’s image as a sovereign nation with their unabashed grovelling and overt support for this criminal state, it was rather apropos that Warmouse would suddenly file a complaint against RadicalPress.com at that particular point in time.
Det. Wilson then went on to describe to the court how his unit has been investigating the website since that time (a period of approximately 32 months thus far) and in the process confirming to the judge that the articles and online books and links, etc. were available to the general public and that anybody could just go there and click on a link and read whatever they wanted without having to enter any passwords or penetrate any firewalls. I thought to myself as he was going on, ‘My goodness, an acknowledged alternative news site and all you have to do is click on the url to it and the home page or whatever document hyperlink you may have clicked on in the sidebar or the menu bar above just suddenly appears and you can actually view it and read it! What a genius that Arthur Topham must be!’
Det. Wilson also told the court that the website has been running and posting new materials on a regular basis ever since the original conditions of my bail were changed with the exception of a few days in November of 2012 when the site was transferred to a new host server.
It was at this point that Det. Wilson then set up his laptop and introduced the courtroom to a special computer software program that allowed him to show the judge, myself and Crown what appeared to be interactive video footage of my website that they had copied to the program. We all had our own individual monitor screens and sat there while Det. Wilson took us on a virtual journey around the RadicalPress.com home page explaining to the judge and Crown how the site operates. Given the fact that it operates as any normal WordPress program would it was like sitting through an introductory lesson on basic computer skills that one might offer a Grade 2 or 3 class of children. This went on for some time and we all observed with great interest as Det. Wilson clicked on a hyperlink in the Pages section on the side bar and lo and behold the article or book would suddenly appear right there on the screen! All of this was, ostensibly, being done to show that any person in Canada could easily access all the ‘hate’ and ‘anti-Semitism’ and ‘racism’ toward the Jewish population that the Crown alleges is present on the RadicalPress.com website.
Having endured this little media sideshow the judge then called for a break at 10:15 a.m. after which court resumed and other cases once again intruded into the schedule. My inquiry ceased at that point. The lunch hour eventually came and when court reconvened at 1:30 p.m.for the afternoon session more cases consumed the time. It wasn’t until around 3:45 p.m. that the preliminary inquiry resumed. It was at this stage that Crown finally got down to the meat and potatoes of its argument. Det. Wilson was presented with a massive black binder that eventually was entered as Exhibit A in the proceedings. I had been given the same binder a couple of days prior to the inquiry as well and had time to peruse its contents beforehand so it wasn’t a surprise to me. What it contained was hard copy pages of four online books that are present on RadicalPress.com plus two articles of my own that were also on the site. Each was given a tab number and they appeared in the following order:
Tab 1: Germany Must Perish
Tab 2: Israel Must Perish
Tab 3: Protocols of Zion
Tab 4: The Biological [sic]
Tab 5: The Jewish Religion
Tab 6: Karen Selick: Just Another Hate-mongering Germanophobe Jew by Arthur Topham
Crown Counsel Jennifer Johnston then proceeded to ask Det. Wilson questions regarding the 6 items posted on RadicalPress.com.
With respect to Tab 1 which was the online version of Theodore N. Kaufman’s book Germany Must Perish! Wilson went on to describe the book and what it was about. He gave a reasonable outline of its aim and purpose which was to spread anti-German propaganda against the National Socialist government of Germany and the German nation.
When it came to Tab 2 Wilson presented his views in a somewhat modified form than his original statements wherein he was very emphatic about the fact that I had actually written a ‘real’ book bearing the title, Israel Must Perish! Now he was admitting that it was a reproduction of segments of Kaufmann’s book and that I had only changed certain words like ‘Germany’ and ‘German’ and ‘Hitler’ to ‘Israel’ and ‘Jew’ and ‘Netanyahu’ and the rest of the text was actually Kaufman’s. Crown then asked Wilson if he had read the Preface to this ‘book’ which was written my myself. Wilson responded in the affirmative and said that he had read it. At no time though did he broach the issue of my assertion (contained in the Preface) that it was actually a satirical article based on Kaufman’s original hard copy book.
Tab 3 was, of course, the infamous book that the Jews have been attempting to erase from the screen of world history ever since it first appeared back at the turn of the 20th century. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion has been attacked as an ‘anti-Semitic’ book from day one and as the writer/journalist Douglas Reed, author of the classic study of Zionism, The Controversy of Zion, wrote, more money has been spent on trying to prove this particular book to be a fraud than any other book in history. And for good reason.
Again, Det. Wilson’s assessment of the book was that it was a fraudulent attempt to promote anti-Semitism and hatred of the Jewish population and added that those who promote it see the book as a ‘roadmap’ of the Zionist Jews’ attempt to ‘take over the world’ and create a Jewish one world government. Crown asked Det. Wilson whether the book existed on other websites as well and he confirmed that it could be found on many websites besides RadicalPress.com.
Tab 4 was the online version of a book written by Eustice Mullins called The Biological Jew. Wilson then went on to describe the book as an anti-Semitic book that describes the Jews as ‘societal parasites’. It was also admitted that this book could also be found on other websites as well as on RadicalPress.com.
Tab 5 referred to the book titled, The Jewish Religion: It’s Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling. Crown asked Det. Wilson to describe the book and he testified that it was in his estimation ‘anti-Semitic’ and then went on to describe how bad it was and how the author accuses the Jewish rabbis of terrible things like having sex with very young children and so on. Crown then asked Wilson whether or not the author of the book, Elizabeth Dilling, was a ‘real person’. Wilson’s response was, ‘I have no idea if the author is a real person’.
Tab 6 was a reference to an article that I had published on RadicalPress.com back on August 13, 2013 entitled, Karen Selick: Just Another Hate-mongering Germanophobe Jew . Finally, I thought to myself, we’re getting to something that I, personally, had penned and I was waiting for Det. Wilson’s assessment of how he felt my writing was such an example of ‘hate’ that it warranted inclusion in the Crown’s arsenal of classic cases of such literature. Det. Wilson then went on to explain to the court that it was a graphic image which I had included in my article that he perceived to be proof that it was yet another anti-Semitic, ‘hate’ piece. I enclose that example directly below for the reader’s consideration.
Screen Shot 2014-01-25 at 9.43.15 AM 2
Following Wilson’s comments regarding Tab 6 Crown then asked him if all of these online books were still up on the website and Wilson replied that all of the books that he found on the website were still there and to his knowledge none had been removed since I was arrested back on May 16th, 2012. It was at this point that Det. Wilson stated, ‘This is a massive website.’
Crown asked a few other related questions about Det. Wilson’s role in the arrest and he explained that he wasn’t present at my home during the search and seizure of my computers and firearms but that Cst. Gill, the ‘Exhibit officer’ has provided him with my property afterwards. It was then that Det. Wilson sent the computers and firearms for ‘forensic’ analysis so that the RCMP could show the court that I was the actual owner of these stolen devices.
It was at this point that the day’s testimony concluded and we left the courthouse.
The Preliminary Inquiry Day Two
Day two proved to be much more productive in terms of time and purpose although it got off to a bit of a rough start. One of my witnesses that I had subpoenaed to appear on my behalf, Mr. Frank Frost, had traveled down to Quesnel at his own expense to attend the Preliminary Inquiry. Given that I had been told I would get my full day in court I was not that impressed when I only had approximately an hour and a half thus far allotted for the process.
When we arrived at the courthouse on Thursday, January 23rd, at 9:30 a.m. the court list showed a number of other case listed for the morning. At that point I decided to challenge the court on the matter and when the judge entered the court room and began discussing the scheduling with Crown and other lawyers present I stood up indicating that I had something to say and the judge told me to take a seat momentarily and he would get right to me. I sat down and within a few minutes he called my name and I stood up and said to him, ‘Your honour, I notice again today the list is getting longer than even yesterday and I’m not getting my day in court. I see this as an attempt by the Crown to prevent my witnesses from testifying. My wife, who is Jewish, is greatly offended by these charges brought against me therefore, in the interest of fundamental justice I ask that the charges be dismissed with prejudice.’
Judge Morgan responded by saying that he was not about to dismiss the case and also stated that there was no design on the part of Crown to prevent my witnesses from testifying. He followed those comments with a short dissertation on the problems and challenges that small communities face where they don’t have enough time and resources to deal with the ongoing case loads and therefore have to juggle and schedule them in order to do the best they can. He assured me that my situation was no different than any of the others. I had made my point and didn’t pursue the issue any further. From then on matters began to unfold as they should and within a very short period of time I was able to begin my cross-examination of Det. Terry Wilson.
Being self-represented since the passing of my former counsel Mr. Doug Christie I was now faced with the task of cross-examining the testimony the arresting officer, Det. Wilson, had given to the court yesterday. I had prepared a series of questions that I planned to ask Wilson plus also a number of other court cases which related to the inquiry process which I intended to use if Crown began to object to any of the questions I had for Det. Wilson. Due to the length of all the questions, many of them not relevant at this point to the update itself, I will focus on only those that I feel are important to a general understanding of the case as a whole. As well, readers should bear in mind that Det. Wilson (and most likely B’nai Brith Canada’s agent Agent Z) monitor the RadicalPress.com website on a daily basis and I don’t wish to divulge certain matters which I intend to use later should the case go to trial.
Cross-examination of Det. Terry Wilson
[Editor’s Note: Please bear in mind that all of the exchanges between myself and Det. Wilson during my cross-examination are taken from my notes which I made at the time I was questioning him and they may not be 100% accurate. Once I obtain a written transcript of the inquiry I’ll know if I erred on any of the minor details but for the most part I’m only quoting the things that I wrote down immediately upon Wilson’s stating them. Readers should also bear in mind that during the questioning I asked Det. Terry Wilson to inform the court as to his level of education and he answered by stating that he had received an Honours Degree in History from the University of Guelph, Ontario.]
I began cross-examination of Det. Terry Wilson by first reading out the following:
‘Det. Wilson, I’m going to begin by taking you to the Criminal Code section under which I am charged. Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code reads as follows:
‘(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of … an indictable offence … or an offence punishable by summary conviction.’’
I then asked Wilson the following question: ‘I believe you stated yesterday in your testimony that the BC HATE CRIME TEAM was formed in 2009 and that it consists of two people, yourself and your partner/assistant Cst. Normandie Levas. Is this correct? Could you please tell the court how many actual convictions your unit has successfully prosecuted under Sec. 319(2) of the CCC since the formation of the BC HATE CRIME TEAM.’ Wilson’s reply was that to date his ‘Hate Crime Team’ had not convicted a single solitary soul! He did say though that there were two cases pending, my own plus another investigation that’s still underway.
Given all the media hype about there being so much ‘hate’ on the Internet it begs the question as to just how much this propaganda about hatred that’s being emphasize by Jewish lobby groups like B’nai Brith Canada, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and the Centre for Israel & Jewish Affairs is merely Zionist PR designed to justify the spending of vast amounts of taxpayer money in order to create these provincial ‘HATE CRIME UNITS’ across Canada that ultimately only serve the interests of the foreign lobbyists who exploit them in order to monitor, harass, intimidate and punish critics of the Zionist ideology, their global mechanisms and the criminal state of Israel.
Considering Det. Wilson’s concerted effort to show the court that RadicalPress.com was wide open to the general public and that anyone in Canada could easily access the website plus all its accompanying links to a vast assortment of online books and articles, I asked Det. Wilson if he had any evidence that the material on the website was actually viewed and read by anyone. His reply was ‘Yes’. Then he stated that both of the two complainants, Agent Z and Ricardo Warmouse plus himself had accessed the site. That was the sum total of his evidence. No shit! That was it!
So it was manifestly obvious that no one else in all of Canada had gone on to the RadicalPress.com website, found it to be ‘anti-‘Semitic’ and then registered a complaint against it with the BC HATE CRIME TEAM claiming the site was promoting ‘hatred’ contrary to Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code. Yet, because two pro-Zionist agents of the Zionist Jew lobby group B’nai Brith Canada (one of them an ethnic, duel-citizen Zionist Jew and the other a gentile lawyer who made it his business to lay ‘hate crime’ complaints and in many cases profit monetarily from Sec. 13(1) convictions) had filed complaints, that, in the Crown’s view, were reason enough to monitor my website; the RCMP did helicopter and ground surveillance of my home and property; stalked both my wife and myself in the days prior to my arrest; flew the ‘BC HATE CRIME TEAM’ up from Surrey, B.C. (a distance of approximately 600 km) at great expense to the taxpayers of the province; conscripted a number of local police officers as well; stopped me on my way to Prince George on business; arrested me; handcuffed me; terrorized my wife; hauled me off to jail, leaving my wife on the highway in the middle of nowhere; then waited for some justice of the peace on the lower mainland to sign a phoney, illegal search warrant so the police could eventually enter my home, scavenge and steal what they could of my computers and electronic files, and make off with all of my firearms.
Does this sound like the ‘free and democratic society’ called Canada that we see enshrined in the Charter of Rights or Freedoms or is it more in keeping with the Marxist Communist Bolshevik dictatorship under Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin where all it took was a single accusation from an enemy and you suddenly found yourself dragged before a tribunal of crooked, conspiring commissars where all your legal rights suddenly vanished, truth was no defence and you’re then subjected to humiliation and the abject opprobrium of the state and either sent off to spend your remaining years in some northern gulag wasteland or else escorted down into a dark dungeon to receive a bullet in the back of the head?
Two Gulags
For those readers who’ve yet to experience such tactics by the state this may all sound a bit fantastic but let me assure you that if it’s happening to me and my family and has happened to other Canadians in the recent past it doesn’t bode well for any of you either as this form of systemic covert repression on the part of the state continues to grow more bold and audacious by the day, aided and abetted by the Jewish lobbyists who now so blatantly advertise their power and influence over Canada’s elected Harper government.
As I thought about the two individuals who’s actions had precipitated all the endless angst of the police and the court against myself and my family I pondered what percentage of the Canadian population this would be when we consider that 2 out of 34.88 million people accessed RadicalPress.com and alleged that the site contained ‘anti-Semitic’ articles and books that wilfully promoted hatred toward people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin. A quick calculation indicated that it amounted to 0.00000573394495 % of the total population of Canada.
103,000 Missing Emails
Another area of contention was the matter of all of my private email communications contained in the two computers that the police had taken from my residence. I had only recently received a thumb drive from the BC HATE CRIME TEAM containing what is purported to be all of my stolen emails just days before the Preliminary Hearing and to date I’ve not had the time to check to determine how many are stored on the 32 Gigabit memory stick. Crown was supposed to have returned these emails back in 2012 and it was only recently that Judge Morgan finally requested that CC Johnston contact Det. Wilson and ask him to return them. I had indicated to the judge that there was a large volume of relevant data contained in the emails which I needed for my defence and given that email communications are considered to be ‘private communications’ and not admissible as evidence in Section 319(2) offences they should be returned to me.
It has always been my contention that Det. Wilson took my computers in order to access the information contained in the private communications between myself and my many associates and friends. When questioned on this matter Wilson stated that the police have the right to take an accused’s computer in order to search for evidence that would prove in a court of law that the accused was in fact the person posting to the website. When asked whether or not he or anyone else accessed and read the emails or shared them with anyone else Wilson did his best to deny having done so although he did concede that he saw some of them in the course of investigating the various articles and online books that were now being used to convince Judge Morgan there was sufficient evidence to warrant trying the case but that his main object was to verify the material now being presented to the court as Exhibit ‘A’. I should add that when I later cross-examined Cpl. Barry Salt he confirmed that when he did his initial analysis of my computers that he found 103,000 emails and 5,500 documents. As well, he stated that the number was closer to 107,500 by now. Unfortunately it didn’t cross my mind at the moment to ask him how he would be aware of any increase in numbers but that’s an issue to be investigated later.
There are very good reasons for me to suspect that Det. Wilson did in fact go through the private emails contained on my iMac computer. This came out when I questioned Wilson on the following:
Det. Wilson, I’d like to ask you a few questions about your own history with regard to these kinds of investigations.
Q: I understand that you once worked with the London Police Service. Am I correct in that regard?
[Wilson replied by stating that he had joined the police force in Ontario back in 1989 and the hate crime unit in 1995 and that he had moved out to B.C. in 2003 and eventually joined the BC Hate Crime Team in 2009. A.T.]
I also understand from the decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in Warmouse v. Kulbashian, 2006 CHRT 11, that while employed by the London Police Service, you executed a search warrant at the residence of James Scott Richardson, an individual suspected of uttering threats.
‘[78] Mr. Wilson obtained a search warrant for the apartment in question, and executed it on September 28, 2001. Mr. Richardson was found in the apartment when the police entered and was arrested. He was charged with uttering threats against property and persons, and counselling the indictable offences of murder and of property damage…
[80] A police crime analyst specializing in electronic evidence was involved in the search operation. He seized a computer found in the apartment, and once back at the police station, made a mirror image of its hard drive and examined its content. Amongst the directories on the drive was one that contained the logs of Internet relay chats in which the user of the computer had participated…’
Q: Is that correct to the best of your recollection?
[Wilson’s reply was ‘Yes’. A.T.]
According to that same Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision, you also executed an arrest warrant for Mr. Alexan Kulbashian, and a search warrant at the residence of Mr. Kulbashian’s parents:
[97] Mr. Wilson’s investigation eventually led him to conclude that ‘Totenkopf’ and ‘Alex Krause’ were pseudonyms for Mr. Kulbashian, and that he had also been involved in the publication of the September 14, 2001, Vinland Voice articles. Mr. Wilson therefore sought and obtained warrants for the arrest of Mr. Kulbashian (on charges similar to those filed against Mr. Richardson) and for the search of his residence at his parents’ home in North York. The warrants were executed on January 30, 2002…’
Q: Is that correct to the best of your recollection?
[Again Wilson’s reply was ‘Yes’. A.T.]
And according to that same Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision, the criminal charges against Mr. Richardson and Mr. Kulbashian were later withdrawn:
‘[105] In the end, the Crown prosecutor apparently decided to withdraw the criminal charges against Mr. Richardson and Mr. Kulbashian before going to trial. According to Mr. Wilson, the Crown concluded that there was no reasonable expectation of conviction on the charges laid against them.’
Q: Is that correct to the best of your recollection?
[Again Wilson’s reply was ‘Yes’. A.T.]
But despite the withdrawal of criminal charges against Mr. Richardson and Mr. Kulbashian, the evidence that you collected in the course of Criminal Code search warrants was later disclosed to the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
Q: Is that correct to the best of your recollection?
[Wilson’s reply was that the evidence was disclosed to the CHRC but that it was divulged to them only after the commission had subpoena’d Wilson in order to get it. A.T.]
And that same evidence, collected by you in the course of executing Criminal Code search warrants was also disclosed to Ricardo Warmouse, an individual who pursued a complaint against Mr. Richardson and Mr. Kulbashian.
Q: Is that correct to the best of your recollection?
[Wilson replied that the evidence had been disclosed to the commission itself and not specifically to Warmouse. A.T.]
Q: When you disclosed this evidence to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, did you know Mr. Warmouse?
[Wilson’s reply was ‘Yes’. A.T.]
The Wilson/Warmouse Connection
Having established that Det. Wilson was involved with alleging and arresting and removing other individual’s computers from their homes over a decade ago I continued questioning Wilson as to his relationship with Ricardo Warmouse, the person who had first laid the Sec. 319(2) complaint against me back in 2011.
I asked Det. Wilson the following questions:
Q: When did you first establish contact with Mr. Warmouse?
[Wilson replied that he first connected with Ricardo Warmouse a year or two after he had joined the Ontario hate crime unit back in 1995 and that it was likely due to Warmouse having contacted the unit with a complaint. A.T.]
Q: Did you and Mr. Warmouse ever discuss the Section 13(1) complaint against Mr. Richardson and Mr. Kulbashian?
[Wilson’s reply was ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: When did you first establish contact with Agent Z?
[Wilson replied that he first heard from Agent Z back in April of 2011. A.T.]
Q: Did you initially make contact with Agent Z or did he make contact with you?
[Wilson testified that it was Agent Z who first contacted him. A.T.]
Q: Were you aware, at the time you executed the search of my residence, that I was subject to a proceeding under Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act?
[Again Wilson affirmed that he was aware of my previous Sec. 13(1) ‘hate crime’ complaint that Agent Z had filed against me back in 2007 but he attempted to downplay it by suggesting that his investigation focused on doing a whole new investigation separate from what was done (and still remains current) by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. A.T.]
Q: Were you aware that Agent Z was the complainant in the Canadian Human Rights Act proceeding?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: Were you aware of any involvement on the part of Ricardo Warmouse in the Canadian Human Rights Act proceeding?
[Here Det. Wilson states, ‘Yes, Warmouse was also a complainant in the Canadian Human Rights Act proceeding.’ Of course, officially, Ricardo Warmouse was not a complainant in the CHRC complaint brought against myself and RadicalPress.com in 2007 although Wilson’s reply now ties in with evidence which I have suggested all along confirms the fact that he was involved but only in a clandestine manner. A.T.]
Q: Did you ever discuss the Canadian Human Rights Act proceeding against me with Mr. Warmouse?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: Did you ever discuss the Canadian Human Rights Act proceeding against me with Agent Z?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: Did Agent Z ever express to you that he was concerned that the Canadian Human Rights Act proceeding against me might not be successful?
[Wilson’s reply was that during his investigation he had interviewed Agent Z and Agent Z had in fact mentioned his Sec. 13(1) complaint against me but that it was only in reference to Agent Z’s ‘fear’ that this section of the Canadian Human Rights Act was likely going to be repealed. A.T.]
Q: Has the evidence collected as a result of the search of my residence been shared with Ricardo Warmouse?
[Wilson says ‘No’. A.T.]
Q: Has the evidence collected as a result of the search of my residence been shared with Agent Z?
[Again, Wilson says ‘No’ but he then qualified that by adding it has been ‘just updated’, whatever that means. A.T.]
Q: Has the evidence collected as a result of the search of my residence been shared with the Canadian Human Rights Commission?
[Wilson says ‘No’. A.T.]
Q: Has the evidence collected as a result of the search of my residence been shared with anybody? If so, who?
[Here Wilson stated that only those directly authorized to be involved in the investigation have been privy to the evidence collected. A.T.]
Tabs 1 & 2 Germany Must Perish! and Israel Must Perish!
At this point in my cross-examination I focussed on the first two tabs mentioned in Crown’s Exhibit ‘A’, those being the online book, Germany Must Perish! written by Theodore N. Kaufmann and my satirical article Israel Must Perish!.
I began my questioning by asking Det. Wilson if he was familiar with the term ‘satire’ and, if so, could he define for the court its meaning. His response was that it more or less meant ‘poking fun at something’. I then went on:
Q: Did Agent Z ever suggest to you that the article Israel Must Perish! was a form of satire?
[Wilson’s response was that Agent Z hadn’t told him anything that would lead him (Agent Z) to believe it (Israel Must Perish! ) was satire. A.T.]
Q: Have you read the article Israel Must Perish!?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: Are you familiar with the book Germany Must Perish!?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: Were you, at the time you began investigating my website, familiar with the book Germany Must Perish!?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: Throughout the course of these proceedings you and the Crown have consistently referred to the article Israel Must Perish! as a ‘book’. Could you please explain to the court why you have done so?
[Wilson basically dodged the direct question by saying that it was ‘sections of a book’ meaning sections of Germany Must Perish! A.T.]
Q: Are you familiar with the acronym ISBN regarding book publishing? It stands for International Standard Book Number. Every book published has an ISBN that is unique to that particular publication. Do any of your records show an ISBN number for the purported book Israel Must Perish! ?
[Wilson’s response to the first question was ‘No’ he wasn’t familiar with the acronym ‘ISBN’. As for the second part of the question Wilson looked again at the images of the article that were in the Exhibit ‘A’ binder and then stated, ‘I don’t recall one.’ A.T.]
Q: Did it ever occur to you that the article Israel Must Perish! might be a satirical reference to the book Germany Must Perish!?
[Wilson’s response to this question was very telling indeed. He simply stated, ‘No sir.’ A.T.]
Q: When you were reading the article Israel Must Perish! on the RadicalPress.com website HYPERLINK http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1313 did you also read the Preface to it which was posted along with the article?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: Are you familiar with the defence contained in Section 319(3)(d) of the Criminal Code, namely that ‘No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2) … if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.’?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Q: Do you accept that certain satirical material might fall within the protection of Section 319(3)(d) of the Criminal Code?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Tab 5: The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling
Screen Shot 2014-01-26 at 6.49.19 PM
Q: In your testimony yesterday, regarding Tab 5: of the Exhibit Index File 25166 which dealt with the book The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today, Crown Counsel Johnston asked you whether or not the author, Elizabeth Dilling, was a ‘real person.’ You responded by saying, ‘I have no idea if the author is a real person.’ Given the fact that you claim to be the lead ‘hate crime’ investigator for the BC HATE CRIME TEAM Mr. Wilson did it not occur to you that you might take the time to investigate and find out whether Elizabeth Dilling was or was not a ‘real person?’ I did a simple Google search of Elizabeth Dilling’s name last night after returning home from court and found a total of 211,000 results in less than 30 seconds listing the various works of the author plus biographical documentation from the Jewish-owned Wikipedia site, the free online encyclopedia, which verifies that Elizabeth Dilling was in fact a real person. Given the fact that in your professional opinion you have determined this book to be ‘anti-Semitic’ and worthy of proof, in your estimation, that it constitutes ‘hate propaganda’ or ‘anti-Semitic hate literature’ could you please tell the court why you would not have taken 30 seconds of your time to check into this matter?
Before I was able to read out the whole question to Det. Wilson he interjected by grinning and saying that after yesterday’s court session he had checked and now was cognizant of the fact that Elizabeth Dilling was an actual author of the aforesaid book. He obviously had been caught off guard by CC Johnston’s question regarding the author. His reply to my question about why he didn’t take the time to check the authenticity of the author was that he was ‘more concerned with the content of the book than with authenticating whether the author was real or not.’
Q: Are you familiar with the defence contained in Section 319(3)(c) of the Criminal Code, namely that ‘No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2) … if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true.’?
[Wilson: ‘Yes’. A.T.]
Question Regarding the Search Warrant
Q: On Page 8 of the BC Hate Crime Team pdf it gives an explanation for Sections 320 and 320.1 Warrants of Seizure. These warrant of seizure sections pertain to the removal of hate propaganda written material. This includes hate propaganda that is stored on computer systems and made available to the public, including through the Internet. A judge who is satisfied by information on oath that there are reasonable grounds for believing that any publication or electronic material—copies of which are kept for sale or distribution in premises or on a computer system within the jurisdiction of the court—is hate propaganda, may issue a warrant authorizing seizure of the copies or order the custodian of the computer system to provide an electronic copy of the material to the court.
Now I was charged under Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code. That section of the criminal code does not allow for warrants of seizure. Could you please tell the court how you were able to gain a search warrant for the removal of all of my computers and electronic files when I wasn’t charged under an offence that permitted such actions?
[Wilson responded by stating ‘Our search warrant was executed under Section 487 of the Criminal Code of Canada not under Section 319(2).’A.T.]
Q: Do you accept that certain political commentary, even commentary which is extremely critical of an identifiable group of people, may fall within the protection of Section 319(3)(c) of the Criminal Code?
[Wilson replied ‘Yes’, he did accept that certain political commentary may fall within the protection of Sec. 319(3) of the Criminal Code ‘but not in the case of RadicalPress.com’.A.T.]
Q: Could you briefly explain your expertise in identifying speech which is prohibited by Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code and not saved by one or more of the defences listed in Section 319(3) of the Criminal Code?
[Wilson replied by stating that he had graduated from Guelph University in Ontario with an Honours Degree in History and that he had been working with ‘hate crime’ units both in Ontario and in B.C. for the past 18 years. A.T.]
Q: Could you define for the court the term ‘hate’?
[Wilson responded by stating that his ‘HATE CRIME TEAM’ uses the definition of hate that was originally used in the R v Keegstra case. A.T.]
Q: Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code includes an intent requirement. The promoted hatred must be wilful, meaning that the words must be intended to cause hatred. What causes you to believe that this is the case here?
[Without the actual transcripts I can’t state exactly what his reply was other than he started talking about Elizabeth Dillings book, The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today and her descriptions of what the Talmud states regarding children, Christians and non-Jews, aka ‘goyim’ or cattle, and how this is intended to cause ‘hatred’ toward those of Jewish ethnicity. A.T.]
Q: Do you have any expertise in psychology which would qualify you to accurately assess my intent? [Wilson: ‘No.’ A.T.]
Q: I put it to you that the evidence you have given with regard to the material on my website is not expert evidence. Would you agree?
[Wilson: ‘Yes.’ A.T.]
Q: I put it to you that all of the evidence you have given is, in fact, unqualified opinion evidence. Would you agree?
[Here Wilson launched into the issue and began telling the court of his many years of investigative experience in the field of ‘hate propaganda’ and ‘hate crimes’ but rather than stating that he was an ‘expert’ he preferred to refer to his work as ‘investigative knowledge’. A.T.]
Q: What makes your opinion on the material on my website more valid than that of myself, the author and publisher of the material in
question?
[Wilson’s reply to this question was that his opinion was ‘no more valid than anyone else’s.’ A.T.]
Hatred on SunNewsNetwork by Ezra Levant
Screen Shot 2014-01-26 at 6.19.54 PM
This is just a screen shot. Please click on the url below to view.
http://blog.freedomsite.org/2012/11/doug-christie-on-suntv-authur-topham.html
Q: On November 11, 2012 I sent a private email to you and Cst. Normandie Levas and Crown Counsel Jennifer Johnston titled, A Personal Appeal. In my letter I spoke about the then recent television interview between my former counsel Douglas Christie and SunTV News Network employee Ezra Levant, host of the show The Source. I explained to you that in the course of the interview, which was approximately six minutes in length, Ezra Levant, who is Jewish and a strong supporter of the state of Israel and the political ideology of that state known as Zionism, stated publicly the following about me:
‘I call him an anti-Semite’
‘I call Arthur Topham offensive’
‘I don’t care much for Arthur Topham. He’s anti-Zionist. I think that’s code for anti-Semitic.’
‘We’re showing you some screen shots from his website. I disagree with them. I find them gross. I find some of his comments repulsive.’
‘I’m sure that Arthur Topham is motivated by a form of malice.’
‘I see hate everywhere in Canada, especially in B.C.’ [where I, Arthur Topham just happen to reside. A.T.]
‘He’s a nobody’
‘I HATE ARTHUR TOPHAM’
‘I think he’s an idiot. An anti-Semitic idiot’
‘…right wing wackos like Topham’
Is this not inciting and spreading hatred toward myself in a manner far beyond that which the Crown is alleging RadicalPress.com is doing?
[Wilson’s response to this was that Ezra Levant didn’t break any law in stating what he did on national tv because he wasn’t communicating statements that wilfully promoted hatred against an ‘identifiable group’. In other words he was free to malign and smear and tell the whole world that he ‘hated Arthur Topham’ but that didn’t count because I wasn’t a member of an ‘identifiable group’. I then said to Det. Wilson, ‘But I am a Christian and so I am a member of an identifiable religious group.’ He had no further comment on that. A.T.]
Following this question to Wilson I then read out my letter to the court. Judge Morgan cautioned me that the letter did state that it was written ‘without prejudice’ and that if I entered it into the record it could be used against me. When I told him that I never received a reply from any of the recipients that it was sent to he said okay, go ahead.
A Personal Appeal
Sunday, November 11th, 2012
Cottonwood, B.C.
Dear Jennifer, Normandie and Terry,
Without Prejudice
Yes, this is most likely very unusual for all three of you that someone whom you are determined to convict of a ‘hate crime’ and strip of their constitutional rights would have the audacity to write to you directly but given the circumstances under which I am now placed, I would ask that you open your hearts and your minds, if just for a few brief moments, and take approximate 6 minutes of your time (if you haven’t already done so) to view this video of the television interview that my lawyer Doug Christie did with Ezra Levant on the SunTV News Network’s show, The Source, out of Toronto only a few short hours after our (yours Jennifer and mine) appearance in court on Thursday the 8th of November.
Whether or not you are aware of it that television show is broadcast across the nation and the world and the number of viewers who watched it exceed, by far, the number of readers who frequent my (as one of the mainstream media’s writers recently stated), ‘nasty little blog called Radical Press.’
Within the span of those six short minutes, Ezra Levant, who is Jewish and who also supports Zionism, publicly made the following disparaging statements about me and my website:
‘I call him an anti-Semite’
‘I call Arthur Topham offensive’
‘I don’t care much for Arthur Topham. He’s anti-Zionist. I think that’s code for anti-Semitic’
‘We’re showing you some screen shots from his website. I disagree with them. I find them gross. I find some of his comments repulsive.’
‘I’m sure that Arthur Topham is motivated by a form of malice.’
‘I see hate everywhere in Canada, especially in B.C.’ [where Arthur Topham just happens to reside. A.T.]
‘He’s a nobody’
‘I HATE ARTHUR TOPHAM’
‘I think he’s an idiot. An anti-Semitic idiot’
‘…right wing wackos like Topham’
If this is the sort of ‘impartial, objective and unbiased’ coverage that I can expect from Canada’s mainstream media throughout the upcoming trial do you find it that strange or unusual or unreasonable that I would want to hold on to my fundamental Charter right to be able to continue operating my website and posting my side of the story in my own defence for those who wish to have an alternative perspective to the one that the msm is now so blatantly broadcasting the minute that an Indictment has come down?
Do you not see the obvious slander, libel and defamation of my person and my motives and my work in these public statements? Do you not see how it already is prejudicing my chances for a fair and just trial? Does it mean nothing to you?
Is this what you, as professionals in the field of law and order and justice, condone and are striving to support in your apparent effort to take away my one means of defending myself from such open and mean spirited vituperation?
All I can say is that, in the stillness and quiet of your own inner mind and soul, you try to see and understand the injustice of what you are doing.
Sincerely,
Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
RadicalPress.com
‘Digging to the root of the issues since 1998’
———
Q: Det. Wilson, are you familiar with Section 11(d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
Q: Section 11(d) of the Charter protects the presumption of innocence. I put it to you that this includes the idea that an accused person should not be punished for a crime unless and until he has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Would you agree?
[Wilson: ‘Yes.’ A.T.]
Q: Are you familiar with Section 11(e) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
Q: Section 11(e) of the Charter provides that no accused person should be denied reasonable bail without just cause. I suggest to you that this means the state should not unreasonably interfere with the liberty of an accused person unless and until he has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Would you agree?
[Wilson: ‘Yes.’ A.T.]
Q: As of October 9, 2012, and to this day, there is no bail order preventing me from publishing content to RadicalPress.com pending trial. Is that correct?
[Wilson: ‘Yes.’ A.T.]
Q: And in January 2013, this court specifically determined that it would not be appropriate to impose a bail condition prohibiting me from publishing on RadicalPress.com pending trial. Do you recognize this as a decision of this court?
[Wilson: ‘Yes.’ A.T.]
Q: On November 21, 2012 I received an email from my then web hosting company Netfirms.com which contained an email letter which you had sent to Zach P of the legal department sometime between November 5th when the Indictment was handed down and November 21, 2012. In your letter you informed Zach P that I had been charged with a Section 319(2) Canadian Criminal Code offence, alleging that I had been distributing hateful speech and that you felt that the contents of my website (quote) ‘may in fact contravene’ and be in breach of their policy. Is that correct?
[Wilson: ‘Yes.’ A.T.]
Q: What was your objective in writing to NetFirms.com?
[Wilson then explained that he had written to my web host server ‘To notify them of a potential breach of their policy.’ A.T.]
Q: By alleging that I had been distributing hateful speech and suggesting to Netfirms.com that you felt that the contents of my website ‘may in fact contravene’ and be in breach of their policy were you not in effect asking NetFirms.com to do what this Honourable Court has been unwilling to do, namely shut down RadicalPress.com in advance of my trial?
[Wilson basically repeated what he’d just said about simply notifying them of a ‘potential breach of their policy.’ A.T.]
Q: Do you think you allegations contained in your letter to Netfirms.com were appropriate in view of the presumption of innocence?
Q: Do you think your allegations were appropriate in view of the right to reasonable bail on just terms?
[Again Wilson basically repeated what he’d previously stated. A.T.]
Q: Your allegations, as stated in your email to Netfirms.com, resulted in my web hosting company giving me a 48 hour notice to remove all of the alleged ‘hateful speech’ or else face having my website removed and losing seven years of publishing content. This sudden 48-hour ultimatum was impossible for me to rectify as Netfirms.com had no idea what the alleged offending articles were and as a further result of your allegations they were unwilling to even negotiate with me. I was faced with having to move the site to another host server in an extremely short period of time and in the process of doing so all the content on the website was damaged and hundreds upon hundreds of articles are now in need of editing to restore them to their original condition. Were you at all concerned that your allegations to NetFirms.com might result in the destruction of important evidence?
[Ditto. A.T.]
Testimony of Frank Frost and Lonnie Landrud
Lonnie&Frank700Final
The final lap in the Preliminary Inquiry was the calling of two witnesses in my defence. Both Frank Frost and Lonnie Landrud are two of many individuals who have come to realize that the mainstream media no longer serves the general public when it comes to issues of social justice. Both these people have been through the wringer and the stories of the injustices that they’ve witnesses and been subjected to are nothing short of incredible.
The Lonnie Landrud story, should it ever receive the attention that it deserves, will undoubtedly go down in B.C. history as one of the most extraordinary and horrific examples of police corruption and government cover up ever to have occurred in this province. Mr. Landrud had the unfortunate fate in 1999 of witnessing the murder of a young woman by the name of Deena Lynn Braem in Quesnel by two RCMP officers, Cst. Paul Collister and Cst. Bev Hosker. When he called 911 and reported the incident it was the beginning of what is now 15 years of hell on earth for Mr. Landrud. He has had eleven attempts on his life since he first sought justice and at present the police have placed a $100,000 bounty on his head. Mr. Landrud has done everything conceivable to have his case investigated by an independent body and to date has had all of his honest and earnest efforts rebuffed by every level of government from the Prime Ministers office through to the RCMP Complaints Commission and the office of the Premier of British Columbia, Christy Clark. During one attempt on his life by the RCMP Lonnie Landrud, in self-defence, shot his attacker Cst. Paul Collister with a 12-gauge shotgun, severely damaging the police officers left arm to the point where ample DNA evidence was left at the scene of the shooting to verify the fact that the officer had been wounded. The whole incident was covered up and denied by the investigating agencies and to date no one is willing to investigate and verify the evidence that still exists which will prove all of the allegations which Mr. Landrud has been desperately attempting to have examined.
When I finally heard about Mr. Landrud’s story and watched the videos where he had been interviewed back in 2007 I ran his story on RadicalPress.com in order to assist him in getting the truth out about what he had witnessed and suffered since the night he stumbled on the murder scene. Lonnie Landrud’s story is best told in his own words and writings and for this reason I’ve placed the url to his videos below and also the url to (yet another) letter which Mr. Landrud wrote to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, NDP Opposition Leader, Thomas Mulcair, Federal Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, Federal Solicitor General, Rob Nicholson, Christy Clark, Premier of British Columbia and Adrian Dix, NDP Leader of the Opposition Party on April 24th, 2013.
Mr. Landrud testified at the Preliminary Inquiry and told the court about his case and the urgent need for alternative media sites like RadicalPress.com that are willing to carry his story where no none of the mainstream media would do the job.

To the Honourable Members:
Stephen Harper, Prime Minister; Thomas Mulcair, Opposition Leader; Vic Toews, Federal Public Safety Minister; Rob Nicholson, Federal Solicitor General; Christy Clark, Premier of B.C.; Adrainne Dix, Leader, B.C. Opposition Party.
I again find myself having to write to you the leaders of Canada and British Columbia to try and put a stop to the attempts on my life by a group of RCMP members and their paid informants.
I have already sent letters to some of you Honourable Members and some of you I have never contacted. So I will repeat my situation to put everyone on the same page.
I will start by stating I have contacted some of your Honourable predecessors before and was either ignored or told that the government operates separate from the RCMP and that they cannot interfere personally or by way of office s they have no mandate to do so.
What I am asking is for someone outside the RCMP with the mandate to investigate the actions of all the RCMP members and their paid informants to do so.
If there is no one with a mandate to physically collect evidence or interview witnesses, I ask that the laws be changed that gives someone office that can investigate outside the RCMP.
I ask that this staff be given the rights and mandate to go back twenty-five years in order to look at all the relevant evidence. I have been stuck in this situation for over fourteen years personally however this has started way before then.
If this cannot be done then I request a Public Inquiry into my accusations against the actions of the RCMP members involved.
On January 19th, 2013 I had another attempt on my life. At this time I will not go into detail. I will state that this has been the eleventh of crimes committed against myself and my life in order to silence me. None of which have been investigated from outside the RCMP. Those of which that were investigated by the RCMP enabled them to tamper with evidence and they never interviewed me or my witnesses.
I do know the more that these RCMP members do and fail the crazier that I sound.
These police officers would like you to believe that I am delusional, however I ask for them to bring forth the evidence that can prove what I saw and what I have lived, wrong.
The stress of this situation is incomprehensible. Then add the fact that the government’s mandate has left me reliving it over and over again in order to try to get our of this alive.
Then add the fact the amount of numerous physical injuries I have incurred during these attempts on my life to silence me.
I will continue by stating that not one of these injuries has been treated by a physician due to the fact that they do not want to testify in court, for one reason that it would cost them money. For the second reason that they are friends to some of these RCMP members involved. Some of these member’s wives are nurses.
I will give one example of the many instances that left me feeling like my life is not worth a plugged nickel.
I had gone to the emergency department at the local hospital and as I was having my temperature and blood pressure taken a Doctor Grapes walks over and picks up my medical records and starts to read and as he is doing this he looks at the nurse and states right in front of me. I quote: ‘Isn’t that funny, me and the other doctors have a bet on who gets to pronounce him dead.’ I could not believe my ears. He then set down my file and walked out the door.
I will expand on this by stating that the cop who tried to murder me in my home and the one who I shot in the left arm with a 12 gauge shot gun loaded with #4 birdshot, his wife was a nurse here in Quesnel for years. She has worked with all these doctors and they all have seen my internet statement on YouTube. (Quesnel, RCMP, Corruption: The Lonnie Landrud Story for those of you who haven’t seen or heard about it).
I will continue by stating that I am still suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and that I cannot even get treated because the RCMP have stated that this event never happened, nor any of the others. I for one know when I shot someone in my home and even if I were in my home alone the RCMP members cannot prove me wrong. That night they had to radio out on a public channel because their ghost channels do not work or their cell phones due to my property’s location. There are dozens of people who heard what was taking place and heard that Paul Collister was shot by me. There are a lot of scanners here in public hands that are monitored around the clock. I have spoken to some of these people. Perhaps someone should start to listen to the whole truth! Like I have stated in previous letters, if I could not prove my story I sure as hell would not be risking my life. The evidence can speak for itself. I can sure point to a lot of evidence, all’s I need is for someone outside the RCMP to investigate and to interview the people that I have spoken with.
Now at this point some of you Honourable Members might want to send me to the RCMP Complaints Commission or the Independent Investigations Office of B.C. (IIOBC). I have already tried and neither one has the mandate to investigate this situation. The Complaints Commission only reviews paperwork put forth by the RCMP. The other’s mandate is to investigate only after September 12th, 2012. This is the date given by Shirley Bond, BC Solicitor General to the IIOBC and this was after the fact that she knew the situation that I have been trying to deal with (I have a letter from her that was handed to her by Kevin Falcon and the reply letter that she sent me). She too sent me to the Complaints Commission. Then she signed a twenty year deal with the RCMP shortly thereafter.
There is not one thing that anyone of you Honourable Members can’t tell me to do that I have not tried. I have had five legal advocates and not one could do anything. I have contacted hundreds of lawyers and cannot find one to represent me. They are all scared of being victimized by the RCMP. I’ve been to the media and had the same outcome with them. I have also tried a private investigator and he too was threatened with obstruction of justice charges which would destroy his credibility. I have sent a letter to Wally Opal, Supreme Court Justice who was looking into the murdered and missing women by way of Public Inquiry. I received no reply at all.
I have in my possession enough evidence to prove that I have No Legal Rights, No Civil Rights and No Human Rights in Canada.
The reason being the RCMP are above the law and will be until they no longer investigate themselves.
Now I would hazard to guess you’re asking why would I continue to expose myself to the danger that I face? My reply is these cops are not going to stop trying to murder me anyway so what do I have to lose? Then add the fact that I have survived all of this thus far. Unlike the thirteen people who have been murdered by these RCMP members and on top of all that the fifty girls that have came forward to the Human Rights watch dogs in Prince George, B.C., then you had better realize there is a lot more at stake than this. I’ve spoken to a few of them.
There is no way in hell that I am going to sit back and let members of the RCMP murder people. Just like I am not going to let you Honourable Members hide behind your mandates and policies. Someone had better realize that I have nothing left to lose but I still have a means to expose this to the people of Canada and the world.
Now I will tell you my story and I’m going to give the names of the RCMP members involved and expose what they have done to cover up the truth. I am not going to start with what led up to the first attempt on my life.
I was house sitting for a friend’s mom when I witnessed the murder of Deena Lynn Bream by Paul Collister and Bev Hosker, both members of the Quesnel RCMP. But there was a paid informant, Dianne Fuccenecco there also.
I phoned the Quesnel detachment of the RCMP however their night calls go to Prince George dispatch. I told them about the gun shots that I was hearing, eight in all. It sounded like a twelve gauge shot gun. I never gave my name. I was told that they would dispatch the police to the location (Sugar Loaf Ball Park in West Quesnel). The next morning I had a surveillance team in a trailer next door. It consisted of the following RCMP officers: Constable Gill, Constable Gruending, Constable Hughs, Constable Hosker and later on Constable Collister. These are the names that I was giving to Sgt. Norrise of the Kamloops RCMP the morning after I shot Constable Collister in my home.
Unknown to me I was recorded and after the tape was tampered with was used in court and with the Complaints Commission when I filed a complaint. I can prove it was tampered with. I had a witness sitting right next to me when I spoke to Sgt. Norrise and what I wait was a lot different than the tape. What my witness suggested I tell them (which I did) does not even appear on the tape. There are also other discrepancies that appear on the tape.
At the time I did not know the names of the members that, with Constable Collister, came to my property. They were Constable Kinloch and Constable Coutier (the ones on top of my house and the ones who pursued me across my landing). Constable Barkman, Constable McMillan, Constable Anderson, these were the police officers that I saw at my gate. Constable McMillan and Constable Anderson were the ones who hunted me in my field. This was the third attempt.
The second attempt was a few months earlier in which Constable McMillan, Constable Rogas came to my friend’s home and arrested me for obstruction of justice. I committed no crime and had no idea why I was being arrested. I was severely beaten with a flashlight while in handcuffs and taken to the Quesnel detachment where Constable Paul Collister’s old partner Constable Sardinea tried to murder me with a pressure point attack that has not healed to this day.
The attempts in between were by paid informants or police officers that I could not get a good look at. I can identify some of the paid informants.
The eighth attempt was by Constable Ray Kinloch of the Quesnel RCMP. He came to my rural home and property. He was dressed in camouflage and wearing the same fur hat as the night that I shot Constable Collister.
It was an hour and a half after dark and he had to travel two kilometres through the bush to be where he was at. I felt a direct threat to my life and I shot at his head and then heard him run through the bush and trip and fall. I left and went to my mom’s. When I returned a few days later I located where he tripped on a piece of blowdown and I found something that fell out of his pocket. I also have a witness to corroborate part of my story.
The ninth attempt was by a paid informant. Again, severe injuries.
The tenth attempt was by someone with a rifle with a silencer that tried to shoot me in the head in my own yard. As I stated to Christy Clark it was dumb luck that the bullet missed me. However I again did not escape injury.
The eleventh attempt was on January 19th, 2013 when, after spending the night at my friend’s trailer (the same one I phoned the police from years earlier when I witnessed the murder), someone during the night tampered with my propane ignition system in my truck by taking a hose clamp off and pulling the hose off the intake to my engine and also pulling a plug wire off the front spark plug.
My truck also runs on gasoline and I was using that until my trip home. When I changed over I was moving and had traveled a few miles before the truck exploded. If I had been sitting still I would not have survived. However I was moving and the explosion occurred beneath the truck lifting it off the ground. The result was a near fatal accident with a family of four including two children. They were passing me and traveling in the same direction and were right next to me at the time.
I’m in a quandary and have no understanding as to why this situation has been allowed to continue. I have tried everything humanly possible to have this investigated from outside the RCMP. There is a lot more information and witnesses that I can expose but for now I feel like this should prove that this is no delusion.
To the Honourable Christy Clark: Re: The letter that was your response after the tenth attempt on my life. Here is what happened after you suggested going to pro-bono law, Access to Justice. In late December 2012 I tried five times to contact them and leaving messages. I received no replies.
I tried again in late January 2013 and spoke to someone. He stated that he was the office manager. He never gave his name. I explained my situation and what was taking place and what I have done. He suggested that I run. I told him that I had nowhere to go. He gave me a phone number and said that they could help me. It turned out to be a homeless shelter. So I phoned him back leaving him a message. He returned my call four days later. I explained to him that I did not need a shelter, that I needed a lawyer to give me legal advice. To this day I’ve had no legal advice!
I again explained my situation. He stated that he was a lawyer and he could not help me. I requested that in writing. His reply was, ‘We get 10,000 calls a day and we do not have the time to write letters to everyone.’ He went on to state that I should continue to deal with the Complaints Commission. This after I explained to him that I’ve been down that road before and they only review paperwork put forth by the RCMP. He went on again to state that I should run!
A couple of days later I phoned the Complaints Commission to request the phone numbers of Bob Paulson, Head RCMP commissioner and Craig Cullen, Deputy Commissioner here in B.C. I spoke to a lady who stated she was a complaints commissioner and that I had no right to that information. That she, herself, could not contact them directly. She suggested that I try the RCMP website. I have no access to a computer. I however have had and the web sites that are connected to me are being stalked by the RCMP. I have exposed two such sites that have been created by the RCMP. I will also state that my mom’s phone has been tapped and after contacting Telus I was told that I have no right to that information.
On January 19th 2013 I went to the Native Friendship Centre and spoke to Criss Dunlope who handles legal aid and explained my situation to her. She asked, ‘Why are you coming to me?’ I told her that I needed a lawyer and legal advice. She said that she was not a lawyer and everything she could suggest I have already done. She went on to state that I should go underground because my situation will not change until the RCMP quit investigating themselves.
On February 6th, 2013 I again phoned the RCMP Complaints Commission. I asked the receptionist that answered if the commission’s mandate has changed or do the RCMP still investigate themselves. She stated, ‘No, our mandate is still the same and the RCMP still investigate themselves.’ I told her my situation and she said, ‘I will have an analyst phone me back.’
I received a phone call twenty minutes later. It was a man’s voice who asked, ‘Now what the fuck do you want?’
Now I am a logger and used to such belligerence until he continued by stating, ‘We have been down this road in 2005 and we will not deal with this any further you fucking asshole.’ So I asked him, ‘Can I get that in writing?’ He replied, ‘No, we have given you everything in writing we are going to give you!’
So I asked, ‘So you’re telling me I have no rights. I just had someone try to blow me up after I was at a friend’s and some one tampered with my propane system.’
He asked, ‘Did anyone see who did it?’ I replied, ‘Well the only enemies that I have been dealing with are cops and they are the ones I’m trying to get investigated.’ He said, ‘No, we cannot help you.’ So I said, ‘So you’re telling me that you’re going to do nothing just like when I shot Constable Paul Collister? I mean it would have been really simple to subpoena the medical records of Collister.’ I went on and said, ‘You know that I did shoot him in the left arm with a twelve gauge shotgun loaded with #4 birdshot! That he is still being treated for a blockage in his ulna.’ I then added, ‘I could implicate him in as many as thirteen murders.’ He then stated that they have done everything that they could and then told me again that I could go fuck myself.
I understand why he treated me the way that he did. In my opinion he did an inadequate and inept job when asked for a review by the Complaints Commission. He went solely on the word of Sgt. Hildebrant who was Constable Collister’s cohort for years and then add the tampered-with tape.
I mean, would you not ask for proof that Collister was not shot? How hard would it have been to ask for medical reports?
It’s also my opinion that the Complaints Commission is just a cover-up organization for the RCMP and is a useless facet of our justice system.
Something I do not understand is why do the RCMP have such control? They are just people like us.
You know that I have been asked by lawyers why I was not dead yet and why are you trying to get us killed?
I have also been told that I am a threat to national security by these same lawyers. I have always asked why? I’m just trying to deal with a system that has a crack in it that I’ve unknowingly fallen into. I’m just trying to stay alive. Is that too much to ask? I’ve had to relive this much too long.
The stress and anxiety and the fear for my life, along with the physical injuries, has left me feeling like I’m being tortured to death.
I ask all you Honourable Members what do I do, let them murder me? I have always stated to everyone that I may have to forfeit my life. That, I have always expected, but I ask you, am I not going to fight to defend my life?
I mean I could go ballistic like the ex-L.A. police officer who was reported to have murdered other police officers. I can relate to some of the feelings but my no means can I understand why he did what he did. I believe there has been enough killing already. That is why I’m doing what I’m doing to prevent me from having to harm anyone. I have only asked for someone to investigate from outside the RCMP and I request to be put in protective custody till this is resolved. I also request medical treatment to see if my injuries can be treated.
On the other hand, what do I do if you ignore my requests? Do I go to the United States and ask for asylum? These RCMP members are above the law and will not stop till I’m dead and there is no one who protects me from my supposed protectors. I always thought this was a free country to do what I want within the laws of Canada. Having to live in almost house arrest conditions for nine years has shown me that we live in a police state. I cannot even go to my own home, I have to live with my mother in order to feel any sort of safety and even then it’s very little. There has been no way out of this. I have tried everything.
I asked the Honourable Christy Clark about her letter dated November 28th, 2012. She stated that she could not get personally involved. Yet she sent my letter to the Quesnel RCMP detachment to be investigated. Her actions exposed every piece of personal identification that I possess to the people who are trying to murder me. These RCMP members have a computer system called C.P.E.C. and now can track me where ever I go in Canada. I ask you, is that not overstepping your mandate and in doing so exposing me to further threat?
The RCMP officer who phoned me on your behalf was police officer Ray Kinloch. He asked me to go in and make a statement. I refused. Reason one is for fear of my life and reason two is I’m not going to give him the evidence so it can be altered or go missing.
I realize that by stating this I’m not making friends or allies and I do apologize if I’ve offended you. That was never my intention, ever. I wish that I did not have to involve any of you Honourable Members but what choice do I have? The truth is the truth and life is like that. I have only tried to deal with what’s been given to me.
I believe that you are the people who look out for society’s best interests. These RCMP officers murdering people and investigating themselves is a threat to society is it not? You Honourable Members are our representatives by way of legal election. I’ve never voted for who would be members of the RCMP and I sure never put them in a position where they are above the law. This has resided in the policies that government has mandated since the time of confederation.
I believe that this arcane system has done nothing to protect myself or anyone from being victimized by members of the RCMP and in doing so has left these same RCMP members unaccountable for any crimes that they choose to commit.
I will state that if someone from outside the RCMP with a mandate to investigate the RCMP does investigate and I am found not to be telling the whole truth I would expect to be charged with obstruction of justice with the full knowledge of the maximum sentence that can brought down upon me. I fully expect to be held in compliance with Canadian law.
I ask you Honourable Members if the I.I.O. office in Ontario can investigate the members of the B.C. RCMP. They have been mandated for a longer period of time. I however do not know if they can be inter-provincial. They are a federal branch are they not? I have no way to contact them.
Look. I am not trying to destroy the RCMP. I just believe that they should be held accountable. I also know that they are a valuable organization with a lot of good people who are a benefit to society’s safety. On the other hand there is a subculture within the RCMP that is a detriment to the safety of the Canadian public by being above the law and investigating themselves.
Please do something. I cannot go on living in fear for my life when I know that the laws can be changed and I can feel free to live my life again.
I do request a reply in writing from all you Honourable Members in regards to this matter.
Thank you. God bless.
Yours truly,
Lonnie Gabriel Landrud
April 24th, 2013