Authoritarian Jasper Violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom by Attempting to Silence Monika Schaefer’s Violin in Canada’s Jasper National Park by Prof. Tony Hall

Authoritarian Jasper Violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom by Attempting to Silence Monika Schaefer’s Violin in Canada’s Jasper National Park by Prof. Tony Hall

BIGOTSVILLE

Authoritarian Jasper Violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom by Attempting to Silence Monika Schaefer’s Violin in Canada’s Jasper National Park 

by Prof. Tony Hall

Screen Shot 2015-11-17 at 10.17.57 AM

To Dave Baker,

I am dumbfounded by the decision you delivered on behalf of some unnamed authority. To Ms. Monika Schaefer you write, “We have considered your application for a busking permit in Jasper. In light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time.”

Please clarify who is included in this “we” on whose behalf you claim to speak? Who takes responsibility for the decision to violate core provision of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the community of Canada’s Jasper National Park?

This unilateral decision extends the so-far-unaccountable decision of those in Jasper’s Canada Day Committee to silence Monika Schaefer’s violin playing last July 1st. Because some Jasperites apparently threatened to disrupt the event, presumably in response to Ms. Schaefer’s peaceful video expression, the precedent was set that Jasper is a place of censorship where freedom of expression and conscience can be subordinated when threats of violence arise.

Now comes this gross violation of fundamental principles of Canadian decency, not to mention the rule of law, as dictated by whatever authority it is on whose behalf you, Dave Baker, claim to be acting in handing down this truly reprehensible arbitration.

Canadians should know that because of the treatment by officialdom of Monika Schaefer, a very active and contributing 35-year citizen of the community you share with her, Jasper should not be considered a safe place suitable for hosting international visitors. From what I have been learning, Jasper seems to be a place where intolerance and arbitrary measures go forward founded on nothing more than the political opinion of unaccountable decision makers.

So far Monika has been dis-invited from her invited Canada Day performance. She has, as reported in The Fitzhugh, been banned from the Jasper Legion No. 31 seemingly on the unilateral say so of Ken Kuzminki. She has been refused by The Fitzhugh newspaper a right of a full response. Her censored full response to the original smear piece against her was considerably shorter than Paul Clarke’s report. Now you and those unnamed individuals for whom you claim to speak have decided to discriminate against Ms. Schaefer because of her beliefs. Characterizing her opinion as “non-inclusive” you have determined she is ineligible for a busking permits to play music in the Jasper town centre.

Your decision is exclusionary as well as discriminatory. The actions taken by you and others are thought to be “justified” on the basis of personal opinions about her video, a 6 minute item that some dislike and many more like. At last count of the 70,000 or so views, over 1400 individuals registered a “like” of the video while almost 600 voted thumbs down.

Given the way Jasper authorities are dealing with this controversy so far, should those that express “like” for the video be banned from Jasper National Park? Should entry into Jasper National Park be conditional on expressing dislike with Ms. Schaefer’s “Sorry Mom” video? Should entrants to the park have to go through screening for political correctness? Should all existing residents be subjected to a thought test like that to which Ms. Schaefer is currently being subjected?

Will the next step be to require Ms. Schaefer to wear some marker, say with a Germany-related symbol, to announce to visitors that she is the punished Jasper citizen whose ideas are so verboten that her violin playing in the streets of Jasper has been prohibited? Will all applicants for a busking permit be subjected to Internet checks to make sure everything they have published is consistent the Values and Principles Statement emanating from the Jasper Community Habitat for the Arts? To do any less would be discriminatory.

I await your indication of who is behind the decision to ban Monika’s beautiful violin playing from the streets of Jasper because she dared speak her mind on a controversial issue that should be treated with nuanced responses rather than with the authoritarian approach that you express in your terse statement to her. How many benefit events in Jasper have been graced by Monika’s legendary violin playing, now transformed into a political football to be thrown around for self-interested political advantage by Jasper’s self-appointed arbiters of community values and tastes.

Yours Sincerely,

Tony Hall
Professor of Liberal Education and Globalization Studies
University of Lethbridge

——————————————
From: Dave Baker <betabake@gmail.com>
Sent: July 23, 2016 11:55:28 AM
To: Monika Schaefer
Subject: RE: Busking Permit

 We have considered your application for a busking permit in Jasper. In light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time.

 habitatvaluestatement2 (1)

GERMAN SURVIVORS OF ALLIED ATROCITIES — A Panel Discussion of Survivors: Charlotte, Helga & Hans With Karin Manion

GERMAN SURVIVORS OF ALLIED ATROCITIES — A Panel Discussion of Survivors: Charlotte, Helga & Hans With Karin Manion
Jews have been remarkably successful, thanks to their significant control over much of the mass media and Hollyweird, telling their tribal stories about World War II — often labeled ‘the holocaust.’ This tribal history, as all such histories are, is entirely self-centered and prone to wild exaggeration. For instance, one of the tenets of the new religion of holocaust is that what happened to the Jews is WW II was the “worst” atrocity in human history. Well, without leaving the 20th century, Stalin exterminated 8-10-million Ukrainians by fame in 1932-33 in the holodomor. Clearly, 8-10-million is greater than the alleged 6-million.  In the greatest ethnic cleansing in human history, 16-million ethnic Germans were expelled from their ancestral homelands in the Sudetenland, East Prussia, Pomerania, Silesia, the lands of the Danube Swabians and others. Three million died or were murdered along the way.
Even dull Canadian high school graduates know that Hitler allegedly killed 6-million Jews, although they might be clueless as to how many Canadians died in WW I (60,000). The time has come to get out from the tyranny of another tribe’s history, no longer adopt it as ours and start telling out own stories.
Now is the time for the German tribe to tell their stories.
Paul Fromm
 
German Survivors of Allied Atrocities

GERMAN SURVIVORS OF ALLIED ATROCITIES.  A panel discussion with three (more) ACTUAL survivors (German) from WWII who suffered the atrocities of the invading Allied powers and lived to tell about it.  [This interview cluster is slightly different from others (a lot of the information is the same as was derived from Karin and Rosemarie’s interviews), so I strove to focus on the 4 presented rather than the background picture/video effects.]

 
Charlotte:  Born in 1936 in East Prussia.  Had to flee from her home in Jan 1945 from the Russians.  Remembers military moving WEST also retreating from the Russians.  Also fled to the Baltic inlet, surviving the Soviet assault on the refugees, attempting to machine gun the ice to drown them as they walked across this frozen inlet.  Headed toward Pomerania, surrounded by the Russians.  
 
Helga:  Danzig, 1932. Escaped twice from the Soviets, head toward Baltic Inlet in the same Danish refugee camp as Karin Manion.
 
Hans:  Volksdeutsch (Ethnic German) born in Transylvania, former Austrian empire (was Hungarian until after WWI) then became Romania.  The town witnessed the fortifications in the East against a possible impending Soviet invasion. Worked in a Labor Camp for the Soviets, also forced labor for AT&T through the Soviets.  Was able to be released from the Labor Camp and escaped to the West, through to Austria.  
 

They migrated to Canada (legally) and made a life for themselves.  As a result of a friend of Karin’s, “Sigi”, these German Volkdeutsch were able to see that the education and propaganda against them was categorically FALSE and have been striving to learn more and share their story.

League
of
Extraordinary
Revisionists
(LOER)
 
COFOUNDERS
Jim Rizoli (LOER)
94 Pond St.
Framingham, MA  01702
***
Diane King
***
Fred Leuchter
If you are interested in helping us defray costs in this effort,
send a check to:
Jim Rizoli (LOER)
94 Pond St.
Framingham, MA  01702
Thank You!

Quebec`s Thought Police Fines Comedian for Insensitive Disability Joke

Quebec`s Thought Police Fines Comedian for Insensitive Disability Joke

Quebec Human Rights Tribunal’s Ward decision is a threat to free speech

By Beryl Wajsman on July 28, 2016

We have written often of Quebec’s problems with freedom of expression. We have received awards for those editorials. Particularly one in opposition to Quebec’s upcoming Bill 59 that would give the province’s Human Rights Commission more power to curtail expression. We have advocated for that freedom to Ministers in the face of government encroachment when everyone was silent. And we have won those battles too, especially important being the defeat of Quebec’s Payette Plan which would have imposed a government registry of – and language testing for – all journalists. But the struggle for the minds of Quebec’s opinion-makers – and its citizens – on this issue continues.

The latest chapter in this saga is the decision of the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal to order comedian Mike Ward to pay $42,000 to Jérémy Gabriel for jokes Ward made about Gabriel in 2010 that the Tribunal found “insulted Gabriel’s dignity” and that this was a violation of Quebec’s Charter of Rights and Freedom. The necessity for such a Tribunal – like that of the Quebec Press Council – in a free society, has been debated many times and is a subject for another column. What is troubling at this moment is how this decision has cowed certain media outlets and how wrong it was in law.

The decision has generally been condemned as a threat to free speech. But the comment of the editorial board of The Montreal Gazette stating that, “…the decision of the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal demonstrates that the right of free speech is not absolute, even in a democratic society…” cannot go unanswered. It was shocking and sad. Particularly because anglophone media has a responsibility to defend the very absolutism of freedom of expression in the face of Quebec’s discriminatory language laws that force linguistic minorities to tailor their speech to suit those very same laws that have been judged to violate international legal standards and indeed even UN covenants. The editorial also failed to recognize that the QHRC is not a court and failed to comment on the dangers of quasi-judicial organs of the state compromising due process – the essential guarantor of rule of law.

think.jpgFreedom is indivisible. And freedom of speech – except for overt incitement to violence against a specific individual or group – is absolute. For any members of the fourth estate to give credence to any limitation of that freedom is an abrogation of their first and highest responsibility. The politically correct statism that is corroding our liberties and pushing so many to self-censorship was not only anticipated and condemned by Kafka and Orwell and Camus, but by President John Fitzgerald Kennedy when he paraphrased James Madison’s warning that, “I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” This decision of the Tribunal is precisely an instance of an “abridgement of freedom” and the self-censorship implicit in the words of The Gazette editorial manifest that “gradual encroachment.”

Having said this, were Mike Ward’s jokes distatsteful. Yes they were. They were not a Don Rickles-like gadfly treatment. But that’s the point! As George Orwell wrote, “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” Ward was poking fun at Gabriel’s appearance. Gabriel is a singer and suffers from Treacher Collins syndrome that affects his physical appearance. The case is tragic. But the Tribunal was wrong to hear it as a matter of principle and totally wrong on the matters of law it decided on. Leading civil rights attorney Julius Grey stated that the decision is so totally erroneous that he will appeal the entire ruling and not just parts of it.

The Tribunal relied on three sections of the Quebec Charter in its decision. Section 3 guarantees, among other things, freedom of expression. Section 4 establishes our right to “dignity, honour and reputation.” Section 10 states Quebecers cannot be deprived of our rights because of certain social or physical characteristics. Several are listed, including race, colour and disability. In the Ward case, the Tribunal found that Section 3 clashed with Sections 4 and 10 and condemned Ward to pay moral and punitive damages. There is only one problem. The Charter is meant to apply to cases where an individual is before the law. It is written right there in the preamble of the Charter. In other words, the Charter is a protection for the individual against the state and before the courts. It is not an etiquette guide between each of us in our daily lives. It is meant to protect people from discrimination where laws have been broken. There is as yet, thankfully, no law against freedom of speech. Furthermore, the Charter specifies that freedom of opinion and freedom of expression are “fundamental freedoms.” The word fundamental is a term of law and puts those freedoms as primordial. Only Section 3 rights have this status.

The imposition of moral conformity through legal sanction is the stuff of tyrannies not democracies. It is important to fight the QHRC and it’s Tribunal on the Ward decision now because we will soon be facing a graver threat. Bill 59 will be voted on in the fall. Article 6 of the Bill would “give the QHRC the power to initiate legal proceedings before the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal without having to wait for complaints from the public.” Article 3 would allow members of an identifiable group as well as people outside the group to make complaints triggering suits for hate speech before the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal. The bill also continues the Quebec tradition of anonymous denunciations and commands a blacklist to be posted on the QHRC website of “offenders.”

What this kind of legislation does – what decisions like Ward do – is put free thought and free speech into deep freeze. It incites self-censorship. And worse. It makes Human Rights Commissions tools against the most precious of rights. Louise Richer, director for Quebec’s École nationale de l’humour, said the QHRC ruling symbolized a, “…politically correct era. I am incredibly worried by the precedent this has created,” Richer told Radio-Canada.

Not long ago, The National Post ran a lead editorial in which it quoted my words on this issue. We leave you with the words that the Post found so compelling. “Leaving decisions on issues of freedom to bureaucrats suggests two levels of citizenship on fundamental rights. One level for all of us, another for state agents who can limit our rights.”

Hear Paul Fromm & Brad Love on Patricia Aitken’s Sacred Cows’ Barbecue

Hear Paul Fromm & Brad Love on Patricia Aitken’s Sacred Cows’ Barbecue

 

Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression & Brad Love, Canadian political prisoner and citizen journalist interviewed on Patrica Aitken’s Sacred Cows BBQ!

https://youtu.be/9owFhBoCc_Y

Paul Fromm, Director of CAFE- Canadian Association for Free Expression has fought for victims of Canada’s thought police such as Ernst Zundel, David Irving, Arthur Topham and special guest Brad Love. Brad shares how writing non-threatening letters to government idiots landed him in prison. He also shares about life in post-fire Fort McMurray.

Frederick Fromm's photo.

SUPPORTING MONIKA SCHAEFER’S RIGHT TO BUSK IN JASPER

SUPPORTING MONIKA SCHAEFER’S RIGHT TO BUSK IN JASPER

Dear Mr. Baker, please reverse your decision to deny Monika Schaefer a busking license in your fine city.

And please do not take part with Mr. Kuzminski of the Legion and others in your community who are demonizing her and acting in a truely disgraceful fashion.

My Grandfather fought for the priniciples of free speech/freedom of expression (and similar principles) in WW 1, was maimed for life, and received the Military Cross for bravery during various offensives. I wish I could have known him, but he died before I was born.

My Father fought for the principles of free speech/freedom of expression (and similar principles) in WW 2, was blown out of a tank, and miraculously survived. He is 92 now and living in a Veterans Care home.

But what a shame that he has survived to see you and others in Jasper demonizing a fine woman who is exercising the very freedoms he and his father fought so gallantly for.

Mr. Baker…, I beseech you to consult with your colleagues, and to collectively do the right thing.

Thank-you for your serious consideration of this matter.

Sincerely,

Lawrence Forbes

See More

Frederick Fromm's photo.


JUSTICE CRITIC GORDON WATSON HAMMERS IRONY IN ELIZABETH MAY — MONIKA SCHAEFER CONFRONTATION

JUSTICE CRITIC GORDON WATSON HAMMERS IRONY IN ELIZABETH MAY — MONIKA SCHAEFER CONFRONTATION

To : Christa Grace-Warrick, Editor

Island Tides newspaper

news @ islandtides.com

comic relief is an important part of politics ; latest handy example being, the irony in how the leader of the Green Party ends her ramble down memory lane, back to the Democratic convention in Chicago, 1968.* Elizabeth May says “I did get a lesson in democracy. … I learned that those with power can abuse their power. I learned that the only thing that ensures we live in a healthy democracy is constant vigilance”. Of course we all agree with that noble pronouncement – in principle! – but woe to someone who actually practices it, then has the audacity to publish her conclusion

After the president of the Green Party, Paul Estrin, used the Green Party website for siding with one faction in the conflict in old Palestine, Monika Shaefer – one of the founders of that Party – started thinking for herself and getting the facts about the foundational myth of the Israeli ethnic nation-state. That was bad enough, but – naif that she was – she expressed her opinion about what she’d learned!!. When the video of her epiphany went viral, Elizabeth May did her impression of Leslie Gore belting-out a tune from the same era = “it’s my Party! ” … and I’ll fly into a tizzy if I want to.

Fade out to the sound of Elvis Costello singing : “I used to be disgusted. Now I just try to be amused”

Gordon S Watson

Justice Critic, Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think For Ourselves & Be Our Own Politicians

Frederick Fromm's photo.

Lady Michèle Renouf – ‘Professor Robert Faurisson’

Lady Michèle Renouf – ‘Professor Robert Faurisson’

Speech delivered at the London Forum, July  23, 2016

View on www.youtube.com


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJXOSdy5Zyo
 
Inline image 1
 

Last month Professor Robert Faurisson faced a landmark trial in Paris, where Lady Michèle Renouf appeared as the sole defence witness. France is one of many countries where normal historical research is criminalised: this latest trial related to Prof. Faurisson’s speech at the Teheran International Conference 2006, (more than 3,000 miles from Paris and ten years ago!). Then French President Jacques Chirac insisted that a way must be found to prosecute the half-Scot, half-French Professor for his heretical investigation of the alleged mass murder of 6 million European Jews in presumed homicidal gas chambers. In her defence testimony, Lady Renouf undermined key aspects of the prosecution case by explaining the true circumstances of the Teheran conference, (in which she too participated). She then revealed to a packed courtroom the astonishing “Guidelines for Teaching about the Holocaust” issued to teachers worldwide by the Stockholm International Forum 2000 – a conference set up at the instigation of Tony Blair, Bill Clinton and the Government of Israel

Exposing the Demonizing and Ostracizing of a Gentle Dissident and Musician

Exposing the Demonizing and Ostracizing of a Gentle Dissident and Musician

Paul Fromm on the Brian Ruhe Show Blasts the Politically Correct Persecution, Demonizing and Shunning of Monika Schaefer, a gentle musician, peace campaigner, vegetarian and environmentalist.

Monika Schaefer is now being shunned and ostracized in her home town of 5000 people where she has lived as an active community member for 35 years. She…
YOUTUBE.COM

WHAT IS YOUR TRUE FAITH? & THE MONIKA SCHAEFER STORY

THE CANADIAN RED ENSIGN

The Canadian Red Ensign

TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2016

What is your true Faith? & The Monika Schaefer Story

Do you call yourself a Christian?

If so, please permit me to ask you the following two questions.

If someone were to deny the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, to say that He did not rise bodily from the grave, would you want that person to be punished by the state with a fine or a prison sentence or to be driven from career and community and turned into a pariah?

The second question is the same as the first except that instead of denying the Resurrection of Jesus Christ the person in question denies that the Holocaust took place, or questions the veracity of certain elements of the Holocaust narrative, such as the death count of six million.

If your answer to the first question is yes then I would suggest you need to think through your faith. If you are a Christian then you yourself believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead for you cannot be a Christian without believing this. If you believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead then you believe that this was an actual event. The truth of that event does not depend upon your faith or that of anyone else and therefore cannot be harmed by anyone’s denial. Nor should another’s denial be able to harm your own faith in the Resurrection if you recognize that your faith relies upon the truth of what you believe, rather than the other way around, and are well-familiar with the evidence for that truth. The denier, therefore, can only harm himself by his denial, and so the appropriate response on your part, as a Christian, is to testify to your own faith in the Living Christ and to pray that the eyes of the denier would be opened that he might see the light of the Gospel, be converted, and believe.

If a yes answer to the first question suggests that the believer is insecure in his own faith, a yes answer to the second question, especially when joined with a no answer to the first, indicates a far more serious problem. It indicates that the Holocaust is of greater importance to you than the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, that the Holocaust is now in the space which the Gospel ought to occupy in the heart of the Christian believer.

These are all things that Canadian Christians ought to keep in mind in hearing or reading the recent news story about one Monika Schaefer and contemplating what they ought to think about the whole affair.

Schaefer, the Canadian born daughter of German immigrants who were of the generation that saw the Third Reich, is a violin instructor in Jasper, Alberta who has run, unsuccessfully, as the Green Party candidate in the federal constituency of Yellowhead on several occasions. In June she posted a video on Youtube, in which she played the violin and apologized to her parents for believing their generation to be guilty of perpetrating the Holocaust which she has come to believe to be “the biggest and most pernicious persistent lie in all of history.”

As you have probably guessed, certain people are rather upset about this. The head of B’nai Brith, an organization which, if I had as little class as they have I would describe with a considerably greater degree of accuracy than they have ever seen fit to exercise, as a Christophobic hate group, demanded that the Green Party “must denounce Schaefer and distance itself from all Holocaust denying groups and individuals.” Of course the party did just that, declaring that “The Green Party of Canada condemns in the strongest possible terms comments by Monika Schaefer, a former candidate, regarding her views on the Holocaust” and that at the next meeting of their Federal Council they will hear a motion to revoke her membership. Elizabeth May, the party’s leader, declared her condemnation of Schaefer’s “terribly misguided and untrue statements,” saying that Schaefer “does not represent the values of the Green Party nor of our membership.”

The matter of whom the fringe, leftist, eco-crackpot Green Party kicks out of their movement is of no concern to me in and of itself, although I find B’nai Brith’s bullying political parties into kicking out people they do not approve of for reasons that have nothing to do with the party’s policies and platform quite irritating. Schaefer faces more than just being kicked out of her political party, however. Thanks to Ken Kuzminski, the president of the Jasper legion who, according to the CBC was at one time a friend of Schaefer’s, a charge has been filed against her with both the Alberta and the Canadian Human Rights Commissions. That yet another person may find herself the victim of the injustice of being punished for expressing forbidden thoughts at the hands of these Stalinist inquisitions is something which concerns and ought to outrage all Canadians.

The Canadian and provincial Human Rights Commissions are fundamentally un-Canadian institutions if by Canada we mean the Dominion of Canada that fought against Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich alongside the United Kingdom and the other countries in the great British family of nations between 1939 and 1945. The Dominion of Canada was established in 1867 by the Fathers of Confederation on the Loyalist foundation of preserving in the new country they were building, our rich British heritage including our parliamentary monarchy form of government, our Christian religion, our English Common Law, and the basic freedoms and legal rights that developed in the course of over a thousand years of history that included such highlights as the constitution of Alfred the Great of Wessex and the Magna Carta Libertatum. These Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals, which investigate and pass judgement upon the expressed thoughts of Canadians to determine whether they have committed what in the Newspeak of George Orwell’s 1984 was called “crimethink,” are foreign to that heritage and tradition, being much more at home in totalitarian ideological states like the Soviet Union, Red China, and North Korea.

It was the ideology that drove these states – the ideology of Marxist-Leninism, more commonly known as Communism – to which the Liberal Prime Ministers who governed Canada from 1963 to 1984 subscribed, secretly in the case of Lester Pearson, more openly in the case of Pierre Trudeau who was responsible for the Canadian Human Rights Act which established these Soviet-style tribunals. This ideology was an enemy of National Socialism, the ideology behind the Third Reich, but the enmity was that of bitter rivalry between virtually identical twin siblings. The only significant difference between the two was that National Socialism, being racist and nationalist, rejected the liberal universalism, internationalism, and cosmopolitanism of Communism. Otherwise they were revolutionary ideologies that attracted young thugs, hated the old, traditional, order, and established virtually identical party-ruled, police states that governed by fear and required everyone to at least give lip service to the tenets of their ideology.

The British family of nations, including the Dominion of Canada, was forced to make a temporary alliance with the Soviet Union in the war against the Third Reich, but the wisest of our leaders, such as Sir Winston Churchill, recognized that the ideology of the USSR was just as bad and dangerous as that of Nazi Germany and it would serve us well in this day to remember that the two ideologies were twins. Those who think that ideas like those of Monika Schaefer ought to be punished by law maintain that they hold this position to prevent a resurgence of National Socialism. The Nizkor website, on its home page, asks the question “Given the evidence…why do people deny the Holocaust?” which it answers with a quotation from some American neo-Nazi group “The real purpose of holocaust revisionism is to make National Socialism an acceptable political alternative again.”

This, however, is clearly nonsense. The first holocaust revisionist was Paul Rassinier, a French Communist and pacifist, who joined the anti-Nazi resistance and was himself imprisoned in Buchenwald and Dora. The American history professor, Harry Elmer Barnes, who had Rassinier’s books published in English, was an American classical liberal. Calvinist theologian Rousas J. Rushdooney, after reading Rassinier and Barnes, pointed to the claims of the standard Holocaust account which they disputed as an example of bearing false witness against one’s neighbour in his commentary on the Ten Commandments in his Institutes of Biblical Law. David Cole, who became a Holocaust revisionist in his youth, going to the site of Auschwitz to investigate after the fall of Communism in Poland, is a fairly mainstream American conservative and certainly no Nazi-sympathizer. None of these men had or have an interest in making National Socialism “an acceptable political alternative again.” Most holocaust revisionists, according to journalist John Sack, in an Esquire article from 2001 in which he described his encounters with David Irving, Ernst Zundel, and other revisionists at a meeting of the Institute for Historical Review, were simply ordinary people of German descent who did not want to think ill of their ancestors.

It would be more truthful to say that it is the influence of Communism, National Socialism’s rival sibling, that lies behind the suppression of Holocaust revisionism. Due to the similarity between the ideologies, it is therefore also true to say that those who want to see people like Monika Schaefer silenced, dragged before Human Rights tribunals, and punished for their views, are closer to the spirit of Adolf Hitler than those they seek to persecute. It has been pointed out that the adherents of these totalitarian ideologies often had no problem switching from the one to the other and it is interesting to note that when the Dominion of Canada was fighting Hitler at the side of Great Britain, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, the author of the Canadian Human Rights Act who throughout his political career praised Communist tyrants like Mao and Castro, was riding around on his motorcycle, denouncing the war effort, with a German helmut on his head and a big swastika on his back.

Fellow Canadians, if any of the spirit of the old Dominion still lives on in you, I urge you not to remain silent while another Canadian is persecuted for expressing an unpopular point of view. It is those who wish to silence and punish Monika Schaefer, not Schaefer herself, who represent all of the things our country went to war to fight in 1939.

As for the Holocaust – make up your own minds about it. Read both sides – conventional history books, such as Raul Hilberg’s The Destruction of The European Jews – and those by the revisionists. David Cole, for example, has an interesting summary of his present views on the matter in the last chapter of his memoir Republican Party Animal. If you find the conventional history more convincing, believe it. If you find the revisionists have better arguments, believe them. If you cannot make up your mind, don’t be afraid to admit it and say that you just don’t know. Any of these options is fine. Just don’t let bullies like B’nai Brith tell you what to think.

Finally, Canadian Christians, when you see Holocaust revisionists being persecuted for their views, recognize this for the injustice that it is. This, and not the unevenness of the distribution of wealth, is what real injustice looks like. Do not be fooled by the wolves in sheep’s clothing, who preach social justice, while licking the jackboots of the ideology responsible for these injustices, an ideology that has been dedicated to the destruction of our faith since the moment its founder penned his foul Manifesto in 1848. If you do not want people thrown in jail or otherwise persecuted for denying the Resurrection – and you should not want that – then you ought to be opposed to their being persecuted for denying the Holocaust. Otherwise, you testify that the Holocaust is more important to you than the Resurrection, raising the question of where your faith truly lies.

Alberta Al’s letter to the Jasper Fitzhugh on the smearing of Monika Schaefer and her right to freedom of speech July 22, 2016 by admin 3 Comments ALBERTAALNEWHDR copy From: “Al Romanchuk” romanesq@shaw.ca Subject: The smearing of Monika Schaefer and her right to freedom of speech Date: July 22, 2016 To: editor@fitzhugh.ca Mr. Clarke, Not only was I disappointed in your article allowing the printing of the condemnation of Miss Schaefer by Ken Kuzminski and the two Jewsish organizations, I became downright angry. I am an 80 year old now retired in Kelowna but was once the alderman and Mayor of Grande Prairie where I lived and worked as a lawyer for 15 glorious years. Allowing Mr. Kuzminski to smear and degrade Miss Schaefer, along with the Jewish organizations THE CENTRE FOR ISRAEL & JEWISH AFFAIRS and the EDMONTON JEWISH FEDERATION, for no apparent good reason other than in your OPINION she went too far in her video questioning the so-called Jewish holocaust. I have been an avid free speech advocate all my life. I believe that freedom of speech INCLUDES the right to offend. If people don’t like what I say or write they don’t have to hear me nor read my articles. But here you have allowed self-seeking groups and an individual to perpetuate a lie about Miss Schaefer when all she REALLY did was IN HER OPINION deny the holocaust. And there are many deniers out there. As a lawyer I have been taught to question, question, question and question because you’ll never get an answer without questioning. So I took the liberty of writing to these two Jewish organizations, one of which labelled Miss Schaefer an “ignoramus” and “anti-semite”, and asked them a simple question: SINCE YOU HAVE ASSERTED THE POSITIVE THAT THE GERMANS WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE KILLING OF EXACTLY 6 MILLION JEWS DURING WW2, PLEASE PROVIDE ME WITH WRITTEN AND SUBSTANTIATED EVIDENCE OF YOUR ASSERTION BECAUSE IT IS YOU THAT HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF. I have yet to receive answers. KuzminskiNDP As for Mr. Kuzminski he ought to be ashamed of himself as President of the Jasper Legion to inflame the public against Miss Schaefer for expressing her opinion. Quite frankly I don’t think that Mr. Kuzminski knows the first thing about the history of the so-called Jewish holocaust of WW2. His bigoted opinion against Miss Schaefer deserves the worst condemnation because as the grand pooh-bear of a prestigious organization he should know better. If he doesn’t believe in free, unfettered speech then he should have the guts, the mettle, to say so. The same goes for every Jewish organization in Canada. I support Miss Schaefer and HER DEMOCRATIC RIGHT to say what she wants in a non-aggressive manner and her video is no exception. Blocking freedom of speech and of the press is nothing short of silencing those of us who believe in the unrestricted right to our freedoms. ALEXANDER S. ROMANCHUK Kelowna, BC Email: romanesq@shaw. ca

Alberta Al’s letter to the Jasper Fitzhugh on the smearing of Monika Schaefer and her right to freedom of speech

July 22, 2016 by 3 Comments

ALBERTAALNEWHDR copy

From: “Al Romanchuk” romanesq@shaw.ca
Subject: The smearing of Monika Schaefer and her right to freedom of speech
Date: July 22, 2016

 

Mr. Clarke,

Not only was I disappointed in your article allowing the printing of the condemnation of Miss Schaefer by Ken Kuzminski and the two Jewsish organizations, I became downright angry.  I am an 80 year old now retired in Kelowna but was once the alderman and Mayor of Grande Prairie where I lived and worked as a lawyer for 15 glorious years.  Allowing Mr. Kuzminski to smear  and degrade Miss Schaefer, along with the Jewish organizations THE CENTRE FOR ISRAEL & JEWISH AFFAIRS and the EDMONTON JEWISH FEDERATION, for no apparent good reason other than in your OPINION she went too far in her video questioning the so-called Jewish holocaust.

I have been an avid free speech advocate all my life.  I believe that freedom of speech INCLUDES the right to offend.  If people don’t like what I say or write they don’t have to hear me nor read my articles.  But here you have allowed self-seeking groups and an individual to perpetuate a lie about Miss Schaefer when all she REALLY did was IN HER OPINION deny the holocaust.  And there are many deniers out there.

As a lawyer I have been taught to question, question, question and question because you’ll never get an answer without questioning.  So I took the liberty of writing to these two Jewish organizations, one of which labelled Miss Schaefer an “ignoramus” and “anti-semite”, and asked them a simple question:  SINCE YOU HAVE ASSERTED THE POSITIVE THAT THE GERMANS WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE KILLING OF EXACTLY 6 MILLION JEWS DURING WW2, PLEASE PROVIDE ME WITH WRITTEN AND SUBSTANTIATED EVIDENCE OF YOUR ASSERTION BECAUSE IT IS YOU THAT HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.  I have yet to receive answers.

KuzminskiNDP

As for Mr. Kuzminski he ought to be ashamed of himself as President of the Jasper Legion to inflame the public against Miss Schaefer for expressing her opinion.  Quite frankly I don’t think that Mr. Kuzminski knows the first thing about the history of the so-called Jewish holocaust of WW2.  His bigoted opinion against Miss Schaefer deserves the worst condemnation because as the grand pooh-bear of a prestigious organization he should know better.  If he doesn’t believe in free, unfettered speech then he should have the guts, the mettle, to say so.  The same goes for every Jewish organization in Canada.

I support Miss Schaefer and HER DEMOCRATIC RIGHT to say what she wants in a non-aggressive manner and her video is no exception.  Blocking freedom of speech and of the press is nothing short of silencing those of us who believe in the unrestricted right to our freedoms.

ALEXANDER S. ROMANCHUK
Kelowna, BC
Email: romanesq@shaw. ca