Monika Schaefer Protests Secrecy & Shunning by Yellowhead Festival & Attack on Her Livelihood

Monika Schaefer Protests Secrecy &  Shunning by Yellowhead Festival & Attack on Her Livelihood

Dear Board members of the Yellowhead Regional Arts Festival Society,

Your action of declaring me “not the correct fit” for your September 29th event goes much further than just a single one-time event. You have done something very consequential. You are affecting my livelihood and my reputation. You are signalling to the wider community that I am dangerous and untouchable, and you are signalling to current and potential students that Monika Schaefer should be avoided. You have also subverted your society’s role as a cultural organization to that of a thought-policing agency. 

If you think you can do this from a position of anonymity and zero accountability, with all due respect, that is simply not the way it works. Hiding behind a cloak of anonymity while taking this serious action is completely unethical and arguably illegal. The board of a Society must, by definition, be open, transparent and accountable to the public. By your nameless signing-off as a generic board, you demonstrate a profound contempt for civil society. If board-member names are kept secret, then it is not unreasonable for the public to assume that decisions can be dictated by just one person, and in this case someone who has a vendetta against me because they don’t like my thoughts. 

It is impossible to know if letters sent to your generic society email address are reaching all the board members. I have been on copy from many concerned people who have sent letters to you in which they genuinely support my right to free speech, and they profoundly disagree with your misguided actions. I wonder if those letters are being disseminated to all board members, or are they being seen by only one person, possibly the person(s) who has strong-armed the rest of the board into taking this drastic action against me. 

It has also come to my attention, through the grapevine, that you have been receiving some threatening and vile letters from people who pose as my “supporters”. I have been told that this is now your reason for not disclosing the names of board members, allegedly because there is concern for their safety. It is certainly not the original reason for hiding your identities, because that would have meant you had the power to predict the future.

In my truth-seeking quest, I have learnt many things about the tactics used by those who endeavour to shut down open discussion, investigation and disclosure of any nonconformist information about what may or may not have happened during WW2 . There are many methods being employed to destroy, defame, and shun those who try to point out the inconsistencies in the victors’ version of history.

If it is true that you have received threatening letters, then you need to know that those letters are unequivocally NOT coming from my “supporters”. That is a deliberate tactic, a psychological warfare tactic, to smear me by association. Those letters are coming from people who are actively engaged in “shooting the messenger” and thereby undermining and distracting away from the message. They are agents of deception. I have now seen this numerous times, whereby people exclaim to me your supporters have threatened me!” or your supporters have sent profanities!” or other similar statements. Who are those people sending vile messages, and why do they not also send those letters to me? They are definitively NOT supporters of me, my message, or of truth or decency.

By subverting the YRAF Society’s role as a cultural organization to that of a thought-policing agency, you are directly responsible for the messy situation you find yourselves in now. This is not of my making.

You have taken a drastic action against me without having the courtesy (or the courage?) to talk to me face to face. I am now calling for a fair and open hearing in front of your board. I am asking to attend your next board meeting (or please call a special meeting), so that we may have a frank discussion about these matters. I am eager and willing to answer any questions you have, and to address your concerns. 

I await your early response,

Monika Schaefer

CAFE Protests Monika Schaefer’s Exclusion from, Yellowhead Regional Arts Festival

CAFE Protests Monika Schaefer’s Exclusion from, Yellowhead Regional Arts Festival

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 905-566-4455; FAX: 905-566-4820


Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director

September 18, 2017

To: The Board of Directors 

Yellowhead Regional Arts Festival Society,

Re: Exclusion of Participation by Monika Schaefer

We recently became aware of your September 8th decision to exclude Monika Schaefer from participating in your festival.

Monika has frequently volunteered her musical skills free of charge for benefits,. She is a friendly woman  who has been deeply involved in environmental and social causes in the Jasper area for 35 years. She has four times run for public office. She is an accomplished violin player, as you well know, and teacher.

Now, she has been told by your Society not to attend.The reasons given are that your Society “promotes a safe learning environment” and that her presence “at our event would not be the correct fit.” These reasons are insulting, especially on the part of a community that proclaims its support for inclusion and diversity.

The insolence of this shunning is shocking. Monika would be paying for her own gas and donating her time and talent free of charge as she has many times for the same festival. The suggestion that the gentle Monika playing her violin would endanger someone’s safety is grotesque!

Your shoddy bit of backwoods bigotry is nothing more than punishment for Monika’s political or historical ideas. It stomps on the ideals of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that holds that all Canadians have the right  to “freedom of belief, freedom of expression.”

The Canadian Association for Free Expression, founded in 1983, is Canada’s leading free speech advocacy group and has intervened in numerous legal cases and before various human rights and administrative tribunals.

Hoping that you will rethink your position and welcome back this spirited musician, I remain

Sincerely yours,

Paul Fromm


Monika Schaefer Excluded from Yellowhead Regional Arts Festival Society

Monika Schaefer Excluded from Yellowhead Regional Arts Festival Society

Ever since bringing out her powerful video, Sorry, Mom, I Was Wrong About the Holocaust (in English and German), Jasper Alberta  violin teacher and musician Monika Schaefer has been the victim of a brutal campaign of shunning. She was banned from the local Legion, a frequent venue for musicians in a small town. She was refused a busking permit last year because her ideas were “not inclusive”. All of this virtue signalling is punishment for her dissident views.

Monika frequently volunteered her musical skills free of charge for benefits,. She is a friendly woman deeply involved in environmental and social causes.

Now, she has been told by the Yellowhead regional Arts festival Society not to attend. the pompous prigs proclaim that they “promote a safe learning environment” and that her presence “at our event would not be the correct fit.”

The insolence of this shunning is shocking. Monika would be paying for her own gas and donating her time and talent free of charge as she has many times for the same festival. The suggestion that the gentle Monika playing her violin would endanger someone’s safety is grotesque! Or do they really mean that her ideas challenge the mental straitjacket that constricts the minds of some in the community?

Paul Fromm




Dear Monika,

The Yellowhead Regional Arts Festival Society is a non for profit organization that promotes a safe learning environment for members within the communities of the Yellowhead Region.

After careful consideration the board thinks that your presence at our event would not be the correct fit for our organization at this time. [highlight emphases mine]

We wish you all the best with your future musical endeavours.

Yours truly,

The Yellowhead Regional Arts Festival Society Board



Please explain to me exactly how my presence would not be the correct fit for your organization. Are you implying that my presence with my violin on the stage in Hinton would somehow be dangerous to the audience members? Are you suggesting that I might lose control of my violin bow and poke someone in the eye?

I wonder if your fear stems from any of the numerous fundraisers in the past at which I have donated my time and music (and gas) for the benefit of the Yellowhead Rotary Arts Festival (as it used to be called). What safety concerns were there when so many of my violin students entered the festival in past years, thereby helping to make the festival viable? 

Why are you hiding behind the anonymity of “YRAF Society Board”? Who is pressuring you to make such a decision? Who among your board is doing this? What are your names please? And did you tell my fellow musicians with whom I was to perform that they, by association, are also not the “correct fit”?

You have the audacity to then wish me all the best in my future musical endeavours, after seeking to destroy my current musical endeavours.

Your letter smacks of Orwellian Double-Speak, “…promotes a safe learning environment…”. The level of cowardice in shrouding your identity is astounding.

The people on my extensive bcc list will be very interested in your explanation of why I should not be allowed to volunteer my time and modest talent at your fundraiser show on September 29th, 2017, for which I was willing to spend my money to get there, all for your Society’s benefit.

I await your early response.

Monika Schaefer

Jasper, in the Yellowhead Region

Gad Saad believes in free speech at (almost) all costs

Gad Saad is Jewish and emigrated from Lebanon due to religious persecution, yet he supports the freedom of speech of Holocaust deniers.

Gad Saad is Concordia University’s Research Chair in Evolutionary Behavioural Sciences and Darwinian Consumption. SUBMITTED PHOTO


Gad Saad is Jewish and emigrated from Lebanon due to religious persecution, yet he supports the freedom of speech of Holocaust deniers.

That’s how committed he is to an open dialogue, something he says is being lost in the western world.

Saad is scheduled to speak Monday evening at the University of Regina on “forces that impede the free and rational exchange of ideas.”

“I support the right of grotesque, diabolical people saying that the Holocaust and anything that I might have experienced is a hoax. Why? Because that’s what freedom of speech is. It’s the right for people to be idiots, to be wrong,” said Saad, a marketing professor at Montreal’s Concordia University and the Canada Research Chair in evolutionary behavioural sciences and Darwinian consumption.

There are only two exceptions to “absolute” freedom of speech, said Saad.

The first is using words to directly incite violence against other people.

The second is defaming or libelling someone.

Those criteria aside, it is “dangerous” to decide what other people can and can’t say.

That’s what happened last month, as Saad was set to be part of a panel at Toronto’s Ryerson University, which was cancelled in protest of two speakers: Faith Goldy, a Rebel Media contributor, and Jordan Peterson, a professor who has refused to use students’ preferred gender pronouns.

The panel discussion topic was “the stifling of free speech on university campuses.”

“I guess the irony was lost on the people who shut us down that that event was stifled,” said Saad.

Saad counts himself as neither right nor left on the political spectrum, but “a classically liberal guy.” He said the political left drives most of academia, which can be detrimental.

“As a student, what you’d like to develop is your ability to critically think, to analyze different positions and then form an informed opinion,” said Saad.

“But if most of the professors tend to be almost exclusively linked to one particular political ideology, then you are removing the intellectual diversity that is needed, especially in a university.”

Saad said he has received emails from students who are afraid to express an unpopular opinion lest they be ostracized or receive a failing grade.

“Really we’re pretty much like North Korea at this point,” said Saad.

“I mean, people are walking around afraid that someone might find out the dark, dark secret that they preferred Trump over Hillary Clinton.

“You could have a million very, very good reasons to dislike Trump, and I would understand probably all of them. But is it really a good idea for professors and for students to be walking around fearful …? Is this the type of intellectual environment that we want?”

Saad said to shut down free speech in fear of hurt feelings is a “slippery slope that becomes an abyss of infinite lunacy.”

He said if people disagree with an idea, they should “fight them with better ideas.”

“Be committed to the truth, battle others peacefully through dialogue, through debate, through science, and then hopefully the better ideas win,” he said.

“But what we’re seeing today is there is a group of people that get to decide whether Gad Saad is allowed to speak on campus or not. And if people don’t see how dangerous that is, then I’m afraid we’ve already lost the battle.”

Saad is scheduled to speak Monday at 7:30 p.m. in the U of R Education Auditorium.


New US Law Blurs the Line Between Hate Speech and Hate Crime

New US Law Blurs the Line Between Hate Speech and Hate Crime

September 16, 2017
Eleven years ago, this essay argued against hate-crime laws. One argument read “People can eventually be accused of hate crimes when they use hateful speech. Hate crimes laws are a seed that can sprout in new directions.” This has now come to pass, I am sorry to say. This week, the Congress passed S. J. Res. 49, and President Trump signed it, making it part of the U.S. legal code.
The law rejects “White nationalists, White supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and other hate groups…” But why? Because of their ideas? Because of their expression of these ideas? No government that stands for freedom and free speech, whose charge is to protect rights, should be singling out specific groups by name and by law declaring them as outlaws or threats because of their philosophies. If they have committed a crime, such as defamation of character or incitement to riot or riot itself, then charge them and try them. But American government has no legitimate authority to single out some of its citizens in this way. This, furthermore, is an exceedingly bad precedent. Who’s next?
The resolution is too specific, but it’s also dangerously vague. The term “other hate groups” has no known definition. Suppose that this term is defined by a group like the Southern Poverty Law Center. The SPLC currently names 917 groups as hate groups (see here for a list). Their criteria are not restricted to violent actions. They comprise SPEECH. They say “All hate groups have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics.” They are very clear about this: “Hate group activities can include criminal acts, marches, rallies, speeches, meetings, leafleting or publishing.”
This Congressional resolution is a declaration that certain kinds of groups, some named but many, many others open to inclusion, are to be attacked by the U.S. government. The law urges “the President and the President’s Cabinet to use all available resources to address the threats posed by those groups.” The term “threats” in the first paragraph is vague, dangerously vague. However, the very next paragraph singles outfree speech actions when “hundreds of torch-bearing White nationalists, White supremacists, Klansmen, and neo-Nazis chanted racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-immigrant slogans…” The same sentence joins this with violent actions “…and violently engaged with counter-demonstrators on and around the grounds of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville…”
This law regards free speech as a threat, linking it to violence, painting them with one brush. There can be no justice that can stem from such a completely sloppy and inexcusably amateurish legal treatment. This linkage is made clear in paragraph seven with this language: “…communities everywhere are concerned about the growing and open display of hate and violence being perpetrated by those groups…” There is no distinction made here between the “open display of hate” and “violence being perpetrated”. As I predicted 11 years ago in arguing against hate crime laws, hate speech is being identified with hate crime.
I am just as uncomfortable with the notion of defining and singling out “hate speech” as some sort of new danger or threat or harmful activity or crime, to be dealt with by government or courts of law as I was 11 years ago with the idea of “hate crime”. The standard categories of crime are quite enough without adding to them a government laundry list of prejudices and aversions that everyone is not supposed to express or feel, under penalty of government law.
Reprinted with permission from

The Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show (429) Paul Fromm – Not Enough Free Speech And Too Much Immigration

The Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show (429) Paul Fromm – Not Enough Free Speech And Too Much Immigration


On today’s show I was joined by Paul Fromm to discuss, “Not Enough Free Speech And Too Much Immigration.”

We discussed: Paul’s background; how he was fired from his teaching post in 1997 after suffering years of attacks by the Jewish lobby; how he has been warning for decades about the attack on free speech which we are now experiencing; how all the laws in White nations elevating Third World immigration above White Race immigration, were introduced in 1965; why politicians in White nations keep telling us diversity is our greatest strength; and many other topics.

Click Here To Listen To The Show

Click Here For Paul’s, “Canadian Association For Free Expression,” Website

Click Here For Paul’s, “Canada First Immigration Reform Committee,” Website

Click Here For The Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show Archive Where You Can Listen To Or Download All My Shows

Court Tosses Out Kinsellas’ “Threat” Charges Against Dr. James Sears and Leroy St. Germaine

Court Tosses Out Kinsellas’ “Threat” Charges Against Dr. James Sears and Leroy St. Germaine

TORONTO. September 7, 2017. A Toronto judge today tossed out a private charge of uttering threats (Sec. 264.1 of the Criminal Code) laid by Liberal Party attack dog Warren Kinsella and his wife Lisa against YOUR WARD NEWS publisher Leroy St. Germaine and editor Dr. James Sears.The private prosecution was undertaken by the combative Kinsellas who specialize in dumping heaps of yak doodoo and vitriol — “neo-Nazi; White supremacist” — on a host of political opponents. They have been  strident antagonists trying to get the satirical anti-ZioMarxist publication shut down.

The National Post (June 21, 2017) reported that in the Summer, 2017 issue of YOUR WARD NEWS, editor Dr. James Sears explained “that his family had been targeted by a ‘hoax’ complaint to the Children’s Aid Society. In his column, Sears accused Lisa Kinsella of …  being responsible for the complaint. Kinsella, for her part, vehemently denied any involvement.Sears said he waited months to inform his ‘thousands’ of friends and followers about the apparent CAS investigation due to fear that ‘some hothead who cares deeply about me and my family, would lose it and do something illegal, like bludgeon the Kinsellas to death.’” That passage, the Kinsellas alleged, constitutes a threat.

Kinsella went wild over a story in the Summer issue of YOUR WARD NEWS. A person who is all elbows and insults in politics, Warren Kinsella went scurrying to the Metropolitan Toronto Police. The National Post’s account continued:  “Kinsella brought the article to Toronto Police, but she was told that there was not enough evidence to pursue criminal charges.Toronto Police spokesman Mark Pugash told the National Post that a detective looked at the case, then asked the advice of a Crown attorney. That Crown attorney, in turn, asked another Crown. ‘Both Crowns came to the same conclusion as the detective’ Pugash said, “which was that there wasn’t enough evidence.'”

So, the Metropolitan Toronto Police and two Crown Attorneys found no evidence of a crime. Still, the relentless Kinsellas initiated a private charge. This harassment is a time and resource waster. Dr. Sears and Mr. St. Germaine had to attend a court hearing August 2. The Kinsellas did not attend. The required disclosure to the defence was not ready. The case was adjourned to September 7.

Publisher Leroy St. Germaine & YOUR WARD NEWS editor

Dr. James Sears leave Toronto court victorious over

Warren & Lisa Kinsella

Again, the Kinsellas were no shows at the ordeal they had inflicted on the controversial editor and publisher. Again, the required disclosure was not forthcoming.

David Icke Event at Toronto Convention Centre cancelled. No Free Speech in Canada! “Censorship just as bad as in Germany”.


David Icke Event at Toronto Convention Centre cancelled. No Free Speech in Canada! “Censorship just as bad as in Germany”.

This is the web page of those who run the Metro Toronto Convention Center referenced in the videocast: Please be respectful …

Open Letter to the U. of Lethbridge Community Regarding Extreme Defamation of Prof. Hall

 Mike Mahon c8424

Dear member of the university community and President Mahon,

Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

A crime of extreme defamation has been committed against one of the tenured faculty members of the University of Lethbridge.

The damage caused by the crime goes far beyond the damage done to the reputation of the professor. It makes a mockery of the motto “Let there be light” and undermines the university’s commitment to academic freedom and the founding principle of liberal education.

There are many people who have aided in the commission of this crime, though some may not have done so wittingly. This letter is both an open letter to the university community and a request to the president that he ask for an apology from one person in particular who aided in the commission of the crime.

The primary defamatory bombshell was dropped on Aug. 26, 2016, when an egregiously bigoted post was placed on the Facebook wall of Dr. Anthony Hall. Waves of shocked complaint immediately emanated from B’nai Brith Canada, which called attention to the bigotry through several posts on its website, including a petition calling for the investigation of Professor Hall.

The post planted on Facebook consisted of an image of one man holding another in a headlock, together with the following piece of text:

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

This was placed on Dr. Hall’s Facebook wall while he was away in the U.S. visiting Jewish friends.  He had nothing to do with putting up the post or with pulling it down, and was completely unaware of what had happened until it was brought to his attention by the B’nai Brith complaints. As soon as he became aware of what the B’nai Brith was saying he publicly condemned the post.

It seems bizarre to me that anyone would find it the least bit plausible that this sort of bigotry could in any way resemble the views of Dr. Hall. Although I have never been a student of Dr. Hall’s I have been researching his views now for over a year. My assessment is corroborated by someone who attended four semesters of his Globalization Studies program whose view can be found here.

If you found a piece of text on the webpage of the office of the president of the University of Lethbridge calling for the murder of liberal professors would you think that President Mahon authored it? Would you call for an investigation of President Mahon by the Alberta Human Rights commission, or would you call for an investigation to find the defamatory trickster?

In damaging Dr. Hall’s reputation this campaign has also severely tarnished the reputation of the university. The repressive actions that have been set in motion have caused bitter divisions within the university community and beyond.

In doing his own research of the source of the post Dr. Hall discovered that the image was altered through photoshopping. The image and text were probably created (though not necessarily posted) by someone named Joshua Goldberg. There are many media reports of Mr. Goldberg impersonating others in order to defame them. He is currently in prison awaiting trial on a charge of sending bomb-making plans to an undercover FBI informant in 2015, expressing the hope that “there will be some jihad on the anniversary of 9/11.”

If you carefully read what the B’nai Brith says on its site, you will see that nowhere do they explicitly state that Hall put up the offensive Facebook post, but it is easy to get that idea. However, in letters to President Mahon, and to the holders of the highest political offices in Alberta, the claim is explicitly made that Hall put up the post.

For further details about the background situation, go to Links to Details About the Planted Facebook Post and follow the links that interest you.

President Mahon reacted on Oct. 3 and 4, of 2016, by suspending Dr. Hall, a tenured faculty member who had taught at U. of L. for 26 years. Dr. Hall was pulled in mid-term from his classes without any process of investigation in which he could present his side of the story. He was suspended without pay, though this was subsequently reinstated.

Since that time a Freedom of Information inquiry shows that President Mahon was speaking to the President of the B’nai Brith about the Hall case prior to Sep. 1, 2016. However, he has never spoken to Professor Hall himself.

The Freedom of Information inquiry also brought to light several documents, some of which contain outright defamatory falsehoods. One letter in particular, which is my primary focus here, was sent on Aug. 27, 2016, to the president of the university, to Premier Rachel Notley, to the Alberta Minister of Justice and Solicitor General, Kathleen Ganley, and to the Minister of Advanced Education, Marlin Schmidt.

Here’s a quote from the letter:

“Yesterday I received a message from B’nai Brith Canada reporting a recent social media post by one of your faculty members, Prof. Anthony Hall. I was shocked and upset, both by Facebook’s initial reaction to this post, and by the fact a respected faculty member at a Canadian institution of higher learning would post such an incendiary, hateful message, inciting violence against Jews. It boggles my mind. …

… the concept of academic freedom … was never intended as a shield for spewing hatred and threats against minorities….

I would encourage you to seriously consider whether you want someone on your faculty who would advocate the murder of Jews …”

In another letter, dated September 1, 2016, the late Bert Raphael, President of the Canadian Jewish Civil Rights Association, also reported to Dr. Mahon that Prof. Hall was responsible for the offending Facebook post. Mr. Raphael cited the whole passage, referring to it as coming “from the lips” of Prof. Hall.

Photographs of both of these letters can be seen here.

Whether or not the authors of these letters knew that their defamatory assertions were false they should have known that the evidence did not support them. On the B’nai Brith news release, “Kill All Jews Now” is an Acceptable Message, Facebook Says, there is a sentence:

“UPDATE: As of 3:15 PM ET on Friday August 26, B’nai Brith Canada has learned the image has been removed from Facebook. A screengrab of the image has been taken before its removal and can be viewed here.”

If you go to the screengrab you will see a name purporting to be that of the poster of the message but it is not that of Anthony Hall. Evidence gathered by Professor Hall and myself indicates that the name used was a fraudulent impersonation, but even if the letter writers had not known that, they should have known that there was evidence against the attribution of the post to Professor Hall.

Is the timing of all this just a coincidence or was Professor Hall deliberately framed? By all appearances it was an orchestrated operation against him, akin to planting illicit drugs on someone, and then calling the police.

There are two important issues at stake here. One is the interest we all have in protecting each other from having our reputations ruined by defamatory falsehoods. The other is the vital role that the protection of academic freedom has in preserving a democratic culture. Regarding the latter, it is worth noting that if there was a good case that Hall had views that were so beyond the pale that they could not legitimately be permitted under the principle of academic freedom then it would not have been necessary to resort to a deceitful Facebook post.

I will be writing several letters to various authors who have been part of this campaign against Professor Hall, asking them for clarification of some of the foggy claims they have made, and, where appropriate, asking for apologies.

However, I cannot write a letter to the person who wrote the Aug. 27 letter (the first letter quoted above) because the identity of the author has been redacted in the material obtained through the freedom of information inquiry. The recipients of that letter, including Dr. Mahon, do know that person’s identity. Therefore, as a citizen who believes that protecting academic freedom is essential to the maintenance of a democratic culture, I am requesting President Mahon to write a letter to that person, asking for an apology.  Could you please do this, President Mahon, and report back to me and the university community? Given that the reputation of the university, as well as of Dr. Hall, has been grievously impugned in the eyes of those who hold high political office will some of you in the university community join me in this request?

Many of you will know that one of the great advocates of liberal education was John Stuart Mill. You will be familiar with the first sentence of a quote taken from his Inaugural Address to the University of St. Andrews in 1867:

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject. It depends on the habit of attending to and looking into public transactions, and on the degree of information and solid judgment respecting them that exists in the community, whether the conduct of the nation as a nation, both within itself and towards others, shall be selfish, corrupt, and tyrannical, or rational and enlightened, just and noble.”

I extended the quote beyond the familiar first sentence because what Mill was talking about here is the responsibility of citizens to inform themselves, and to protest, when governments fail to apply honesty and humanity in their internal and external affairs.  This is exactly the sort of thing that Professor Hall used to speak of in his courses, and continues to speak of, in venues like False Flag Weekly News and the American Herald Tribune.

It is true that Professor Hall’s views are outside the mainstream. However, if university students are to learn to think critically they should be encouraged to engage with such views. Liberal education cannot be promoted by allowing a professor to be bullied out of the classroom with deceitful character assassination. To quote again from Mill, this time from On Liberty:

“He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that.”

Remember Semmelweiss. In 1847 he observed that fatal instances of puerperal fever could be drastically reduced if doctors would wash their hands with chlorinated lime solutions before delivering babies. This observation was not well aligned with the prevailing medical theories of the time, and was repulsed by the doctors, who felt insulted. Many thousands of women died needlessly until years after the death of Semmelweiss, when the medical profession finally realized that he had been right.

Is it not one of the aims of liberal education to foster the assessment of unorthodox views honestly, weighing the evidence for and against them, as opposed to silencing them without a fair hearing?


Andrew Blair

*(University of Lethbridge President, Dr. Mike Mahon. Image courtesy of ulethbridge/ YouTube) 

Alison Chabloz — Too Extreme for the BNP

Alison Chabloz — Too Extreme for the BNP


During my latest ban from here, censorship fanatics were again targeting my YouTube account.

In an unprecedented move, my song ‘I like the story as it is’ was removed, despite having already been ‘sandboxed’ AND despite being clearly marked as ‘SATIRE’ in both the title and the meta tags.

Maybe if I’d threatened to kill queers, used abusive language against women (Eminem) or called for all Whites to be genocided (most Black rap artists), I’d have at least six million YouTube subscribers by now?

In defiance, I uploaded another new song. Already sandboxed and banned in the usual countries, it should nevertheless still be visible to most.