What’s the Use?

What’s the Use?


How often have I heard this note of discouragement when we speak of activism, whether it is attending a protest or writing a letter to an MP? I don’t feel it myself, but I know some others do. What pretends to be the voice of “realism” is really the chattering devil of planned discouragement. The Dark Forces seeking to vacuum away our freedoms have been fascinated by the study of psychology — what makes people’s minds tick and, then, how can this information be used to manipulate or control them.
Modern tyranny has come to the conclusion that they don’t have to physically eliminate all dissenters or doubters. Just scare the majority into compliance (as they have with masks in the COVID Craziness). Then, convey the idea that their position is inevitable. Not everyone will agree, but as long as they are discouraged and passive, the evil agenda prevails.
This brings me o a protest on October 18, the day Lady Michele Renouf was to go on trial in Dresden for remarks made in 2018 at a February 13 memorial held every year for the 300,000+ German civilians incinerated in that city on February 13-14, 1945. The war was essentially over. Dresden was not a manufacturing or military target. It was, indeed, acity to which perhaps 250,000 refugees fleeing the Soviet armies just 70 miles away had fled. Churchill himself in sending the waves of incendiary bombers had gloated that he would roast the German people. Anyway, Lady Michele’s brief impromptu speech caught the attention of the German thought police.
She was detained, interrogated, released and an |”investigation” begun to see whether she had violated Sec. 130 of the German Criminal Code — “racial incitement of the masses”. Her speech had made no reference to race.This law, however, is used to persecute anyone who questions the Hollywood version of World War II or the Jewish tribal history more often called he holocaust. In due course, she was charged. The trial was to commence October 16.
On that day, supporters of the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) held a protest outside the German Consulate in Toronto. We had a good many discussions with curious passersby. A short video was made of the protest. Reports of the protest spread over the Internet.
We had only a vague report later that day. Something happened in the German court but both Lady Michele and her assistant Peter Rushton were under some sort of gag order. We would not learn until November 2 that the German prosecutor had, at the last minute, withdrawn the charges. The gag order was in place until the formal papers had been signed and filed.Lady Michele was free.
What’s the Use?Here’s what Peter Rushton wrote: ” It was great to see you campaigning for Michèle’s acquittal: for once the international pressure and fear of official embarrassment has succeeded!
The fake news media may not have covered our protest but people in Germany were watching. There were several reasons likely motivating the German authorities to retreat from the battlefield having  menaced Lady Michele with this case for 32 months. However, international notice and condemnation were one of them
We did our part! We did some good!
Years agoU.S. patriots had a motivational saying: “The letter not written influences no one.”
We don’t alway see the results of our actions. Sometimes, indeed, they are ignored but our input goes into the mix influencing the decision makers.
As Luther said as he nailed his 95 theses or arguments  to the cathedral door in Wittenburg setting off the Protestant reformation: Here I stand, I can do no other.” ( Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders).

FREE LADY MICHELE DEMO OCT 16 2.jpg

CAFE, Box 332, Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

The Wuhan Flu has cramped CAFE’s operations, especially holding meetings, as we do across Canada. This has had a major impact on our income. Nevertheless, we have maintained our publishing schedule, bringing out the Free Speech Monitor each month and, of course, maintaining our very active website — http://cafe.nfshost.com. Can you help make up the financial shortfall?

__ Orders from the other side of this coupon $____.

___Please renew my subscription for  2020 to the Free Speech Monitor ($20).

___  Wuhan Flu or not, I am one of Canada’s tiny band of free speech freedom fighters. Here is my donation of $______ to assist in CAFE’s work so that more people “get it” about the importance of freedom of speech in these times of fear, hysteria and power grabs by control freaks.

Please charge ______myVISA#________________________________________________________________

Expiry date: __________ Signature:_______________________________________________________________________________

Name:____________________________________________________________________________________

Address: __________________________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________Email______________________________

[SIDE 1]

Great Speeches DVDS & A NEW BOOKLET

__ HOT OFF THE PRESS. Why I Left the Left & Did the Right Thing

by Reigh of Wight. One woman’s extraordinary journey from the bitter left

to the cause of freedom. NEW! $7.00

___The COVID Scamdemic & Black Lives Matter & Anti-Racism:

Words for Anti-White by Paul Fromm. Dynamic talk given in Vancouver,

 July 31, 2020.  DVD. $10.00

__Monika Schaefer: My Story — My Trial, My “Crime”  & 10 Months in

 German Jail — Hamilton, January  22, 2019. DVD $10

___ Immigration: The Times & Tides Are Changing by Paul Fromm.

Vancouver, September 23, 2018. DVD $10.00

___ The Syrian Invasion & An Evil Man Count Richard Coudenhove Kalergi

(a name you must know to understand the current Third World Invasion of Europe)

by Paul Fromm. Vancouver, February 20, 2016. CD $10.00

___ Crushing the Enemy With Satire & Paying the Price in Court by Dr. James Sears.

 Hamilton, February 20, 2019. DVD. $10.00

___An Update on Revisionism by Diane King & Jim Rizoli, Revisionist videographers

Toronto, November 2, 2017.  DVD $10.00

___ The Declining Influence of the Roman Catholic Church by Hutton Gibson

(Mel Gibson’s father) DVD $10.00

Free Speech Director Paul Fromm Harassed by CBSA  

Free Speech Director Paul Fromm Harassed by CBSA
MISSISSAUGA. November 30, 2019. I arrived bleary-eyed this morning at 5:30 on Air Canada after short, amazing vacation in South America. However, I would have to put up with an intrusive nearly hour and a half of harassment by Canada Border Services Agency agents. As former New York Yankees’ catcher Yogi Berra used to say: “It was deja vu all over again.” For over 20 years, I have been subjected to on again off again harassment by Customs Canada, now Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) for my political views.

In the late 1990s, I had two book bags containing over 90 titles including  Irish Myths seized and held as possible “hate propaganda”. In the end, I got almost all the titles back. In 2008, Customs Canada stole by laptop because I would not provide them with the password so they could snoop. [The law has now changed and gives the CBSA snoops the right to rifle through your cellphone or laptop. So much for the “right to privacy” government agencies love to invoke to hide information THEY don’t want their taxpayer employers to have!].
On arrival nearly a week before in Latin America, that country’s border force subjected visitors to a quick swipe of their passport, a photo and an impression of their thumbprint before welcoming them with: “Enjoy your stay in ….”

cbsa.jpg

​On arrival back in my own country, I proceeded with passport and customs declaration in hand to an area where there is a bank of machines. You insert your passport. The machine reads it. Then, you insert your customs declaration and the machine reads it and shoots you back a photocopy. At least, that’s the way it’s supposed to work. The machines are temperamental. I tried three several times each without success. I then headed in a line to present my failed paperwork. I was sent on to an inspector at a wicket. As I arrived to line up, a couple ahead of me had just been cleared by the 25-ish male agent. I headed up to the wicket. Oozing attitude and authority, he snapped: “Get back. You’re supposed to wait to be called.” I’m a veteran traveller. This must be some new rule he invented after an unhappy Friday evening with his girlfriend. I rolled my eyes and took two dramatic paces back. I was then told I could come forward. He scanned my passport and scribbled some numbers on my declaration sheet.
I had an uneasy feeling that as proof of his power Attitude Guy was sending me on to secondary inspection. After I had retrieved my suitcase from the luggage carousel, I headed to a final check where you present your customs form to an agent. Sure enough,  I was being sent on to secondary inspection. I spent about 15 minutes waiting to see an agent. Others at secondary inspection seemed to have bulging suitcases perhaps with contraband. One had two pets and their paperwork. She was seen by several agents, sent inside for some further processing and cleared. I seemed to be the last weary traveller standing. At last, I was summoned by a short totally bald agent — the Bald Guy. In this “transparent” open society none of these bureaucrats has names. It must be for their own security!

The Bald Guy scanned my passport, stared and stared at the computer screen, and then began a laborious series of questions: Where had I been? How long? Where had I stayed? He kept returning to this question. Firstly, as a Canadian citizen, I had an absolute right to return. The only real issue would be whether I was carrying any contraband — endangered animal parts, currency over $10,000 in value (I wish), “hate propaganda” (whatever that is) or goods in excess of the duty free limit. [In my case, a mere $55 worth!] Frankly, where I stayed — at a hotel, at a hostel, in a packing crate under a bridge — was none of this man’s business? It was part of the psychological warfare, though, Then, more questions. What do I do?  I told him I was a director. Of what? “The Canadian Association for Free Expression.” He wrote that down, but got the name messed up. What does it do? I gave him a brief description of our work. But what does it matter, I wondered?
He then took my camera and rapidly went through the pictures. “You have a lot of pictures,” the Bald Guy observed. [It’s a camera. That’s what it’s used for, I thought.] Ah, ha. “Where was this picture taken?” he demanded. I asked him to turn the device so that I could see, “Was it in Thailand?” I wasn’t there. “I think it was in Japan,” I told him. Some dozen pictures later, he saw more Oriental writing. “Where was that taken?” In Japan, I told him. Somewhat later, he found a picture of me and a woman. “Is that your wife?” No, I replied, a friend. And on and on. All of this time wasting interrogation was utterly irrelevant.
Next, the Bald Guy turned his attention to my laptop. He looked at the icons on the screen and some photos. Ah, ha! Another discovery. There was a video I had recorded: CBSA Harasses Canadian Traveller. What was that about?” he demanded. [The sort of thing you’re doing now, I thought to myself.] In my role as a director of a free speech organization, I had been phoned by a young man who had some teeshirts seized on his return from Germany. They were heavy metal teeshirts from bands he’d heard. “What did you do?” he insisted. “I told him what his rights were.” “Were they Nazi teeshirts?” he quizzed. “I don’t know,” I told him. “I never saw them.” [Again, what did any of this third degree matter?]
Now, it was on to my bag of reading material. He pawed through a number of newspaper clippings. Then, he discovered two old Spanish textbooks. “Are you learning Spanish?” Sherlock Holmes asked me. “I’m trying to,” I answered.

Finally, it was my suitcase’s turn to be searched. I had two small tins of tea. He showed no interest. They might have hidden cocaine. I had two carefully packaged wine bottles. He showed no interest. There were some clothes, as you’d expect.
I could see he was bored. He told me to close up the suitcase. He handed me back my passport. “You’re good to go.” I had been detained an hour and a quarter with the Bald Guy.

The interrogation had served no purpose except to delay me and harass me. Ernst Zundel told me customs agents would regularly detain him for three hours every time he returned to Canada. It’s all part of the soft tyranny imposed by our government that is eager to welcome back and “rehabilitate” ISIS fighters. — Paul Fromm

CAFE Protests Trudeau’s Poisonous Immigration Policy & Hamilton City Council’s Refusal to Hear Free Speech Delegations

CAFE Protests Trudeau’s Poisonous Immigration Policy & Hamilton City Council’s Refusal to Hear Free Speech Delegations

 

 

Supporters of the Canadian Association for Free Expression & the Canadian Nationalist Party rallied outside Hamilton City Hall Today.

We were there to protests Trudeau’s demography wrecking open door immigration, his fanatical pushing of the LGBTQ agenda & Hamilton City Hall’s anti-free speech policies, including their refusal to hear a delegation by CAFE Director Paul Fromm on just such anti-free speech policies.

One elderly Christian lady had her signed ripped up.

CAFE Calls on Elections Canada to Investigate Bullying & Intimidation Tactics of Canadian Anti-Hate Network Aimed at Registration of a New Populist Party

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 905-289-674-4455; FAX: 289-674-4820;

Website http://cafe.nfshost.com

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

 

For Immediate Release

CAFE Calls on Elections Canada to Investigate Bullying & Intimidation Tactics of Canadian Anti-Hate Network Aimed at Registration of a New Populist Party

REXDALE, July 15, 2019. Today the Canadian Association for Free Expression is filing a formal complaint with Elections Canada demanding an investigation into bullying and intimidation of voters by a group of anti-racist extremists calling themselves the Canadian Anti-Hate Network. In July 10 Twitter postings, this group has threatened to publicize the names and addresses of persons who sign up as member of the newly formed populist Canadian Nationalist Party, in order to qualify the party for official recognition as a party in the upcoming October federal election.

In their July 10 statement this group of anti-democratic fanatics stated:  “The Canadian Anti-Hate Network will publish the names of 250 members of the neo-Nazi Canadian Nationalist Party if they are successful in becoming a registered political party. We plan to publish these names and their cities of residence as soon as they become public, and will encourage local media to run stories naming neo-Nazi supporters in their communities. … This kind of naming and shaming is part of our mandate of exposing hate groups to make sure communities are well-informed, and to ensure that there are significant, nonviolent social consequences for supporting hate groups.”

 

“This ugly bullying threat is libellous,” says CAFE Director Paul Fromm. “The Canadian Nationalist Party are traditional Canadians and populists, not National Socialist wannabees. CAHN, who boasts longtime anti-free speech campaigners like Bernie Farber and Richard Warman as board members, seeks  to intimidate citizens from their right to vote as they choose.”

 

CAFE Calls on Elections Canada to Investigate Bullying & Intimidation Tactics of Canadian Anti-Hate Network Aimed at Registration of a New Populist Party

 “The list of signators  ti register a political party is public ONLY for the purposes of establishing the bona fides of party supporters,” he adds.

In a further tweet, the hitmen of political correctness gleefully anticipate the loss of jobs for people participating in this democratic process. In a July 10 tweet, Canadian Anti-Hate Network Board member Evan Balgord, a former assistant to Toronto’s anti-free speech Mayor John Tory, enthused: “Employer concerns are a natural consequence of supporting a neo-Nazi party. Practically, however, we won’t have the time to research 250 individuals. Local media might. I’d note they can avoid that consequence by emailing Elections Canada and withdrawing their support. – Evan”

Then, as a further to interfere with the secret ballot and the right of citizens to freely choose the party they prefer, the CAHN offers a carrot:  “If any of members of the Canadian Nationalist Party want to avoid being named and facing the social consequences of supporting a neo-Nazi party, they can email Elections Canada at info@elections.ca to withdraw their support.”

The threatening tactics of the CAHN are no different than posting goons armed with clubs outside polling stations reminding voters not to vote the “wrong” way, says Mr. Fromm an activist with 48 years experience battling the forces of censorship and speech constraint in Canada.

Paul Fromm and the Persecution of Dr. James Sears, Editor of YOUR WARD NEWS

 Paul Fromm and the Persecution of Dr. James Sears, Editor of YOUR WARD NEWS

 

 

YOUTUBE.COM
Paul Fromm, Founder of C.A.F.E. Canadian Association for Free Expression talks with us about the Attacks and Persecution of Dr. James Sears, Editor of YOUR WARD NEWS.

 

ANATOMY OF A FAKE NEWS MEDIA SMEAR

ANATOMY OF A FAKE NEWS MEDIA SMEAR

One of the great contributions of President Donald Trump is to undermine and expose what he calls the lying media or the “fake news” media. Much of North America’s media is in the control of the Cultural Marxists or minority special interest groups.  News, as I have argued for years, is not really news — that is,. the facts about what is happening, like the scores of last night’s hockey game — but, in fact, a soap opera, where there are good guys and bad guys and few in betweens. And, guess what, we in the nationalist or pro-freedom or populist movement are always the bad guys. Whatever the specific story might be, through labels and selective presentation of details, our side is presented as evil The reader or viewer is not presented with objective facts from which he or she can then form an opinion.

Here is a textbook example of soap opera false news journalism — a recent smear on me by the HAMILTON SPECTATOR, which, I would more properly dub as the EXPECTORATOR.

Paul Fromm

Director

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

_______________________________________

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 289-674-4455;

Website: http://cafe.nfshost.com

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

 

March 25, 2019

 

Mr. Paul Berton, Editor-in-Chief,

THE HAMILTON SPECTATOR,

44 Frid St.,

Hamilton, ON.,

L8N 3G3

 

Dear Mr. Berton:

 

 

On March 19, THE HAMILTON SPECTATOR printed an article by Teviah Moro entitled “Paul Fromm investigated for posting of New Zealand shooter’s manifesto.”

 

The entire article is defamatory, misleading to the point of falsehood and utterly unprofessional. I demand a complete retraction.

 

The article has three elements: I posted Brenton Tarrant’s manifesto; there was a complaint about this; the Hamilton Police “hate crimes unit” is investigating.

 

I am the main focus of this article. Many details are given about me, all of a negative nature. However, I was never interviewed or asked to comment.

 

The headline itself clearly suggests that I agree with the shooter. Otherwise why would I post the manifesto.

 

The opening paragraph strengthens that impression by labelling me a “White supremacist”, The accused shooter has also been widely identified as a “White supremacist.” Interestingly, when one accesses this story on the SPECTATOR’S website, there is a link to an article announcing my candidacy  for mayor last year correctly identifying me as a “White nationalist” (“Self proclaimed White nationalist Paul Fromm running for Mayor of Hamilton”). There is a profound difference. A nationalist wants to promote the interests of his people, in this case, the European people. A supremacist seeks to rule over or dominate others. I emphatically reject the “‘White Supremacist” label, as your reporter would have learned had she contacted me.

 

What is missing in the story is the vital information that I wrote an introduction before posting the manifesto and made it quite clear that I reject violence. I largely agreed with Tarant that European people are being replaced in their own countries by massive Third World immigration and that this is a bad thing. I urged peaceful discussion but pointed out that, in many Western nations, we are restricted by “hate laws” and other legal barriers. I warned that, when you silence the man of the pen, you must deal with the man of the sword. I attach the introduction as it appears on the CAFE website.

 

Did you reporter even look at the online post? If so, she’d have seen the story changing introduction: I do not support violence. If she didn’t look at the post, she’s incompetent and should be fired. If she did, she’s a deliberate liar by suppressing vital information and should be fired.  Another media outlet, Global did interview me and got the story essentially correct,

 

The article is about me but never quotes me once. Whatever views I might have are explained by hostile sources. A paragraph in the version of this article that appeared in the Toronto Star quotes an American group, the Southern Poverty Law Centre. This group is discredited and notorious. It raises hundreds of millions of dollars from liberal donors by spreading hyperventilating accusations of “hate” against many people and groups on the right of the political spectrum. It has been successfully sued by its victims on a number of occasions. It recently fired its co-founder and longtime board member Morris Dees for persistent sexual harassment of Centre employees. Yet, the Star version of the article quotes the SPLC as saying the Canadian Association for Free Expression of which I am the Director defends “anti-Semites, racists and Holocaust deniers.” Yes, we support anyone whose rights to free speech are being impinged. Over the years, we’ve also defended Little Sisters bookstore in Vancouver which was being harassed by Canada Customs for importing homosexual and lesbian publications. We opposed efforts by pro-censorship groups to keep Minister Lewis Farrakhan out of Canada for a series of talks, some years ago. Again, fairness involving an interview with me would have provided a different perspective.

 

The article reeks of bias. I am described and defined only through the words of mortal enemies of free speech.

 

The only details about me in the article are those calculated to be negative, with no balance provided by a reaction or explanation I might have made, had I been asked.

 

The article is a defamatory hatchet job. It is utterly unfair to me and misleading to the HAMILTON SPECTATOR’s readers.

 

I demand a retraction and want to hear from you by week’s end.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

 

 

Paul Fromm

 

INTRODUCTION TO BRENTON TERRANT’S NEW ZEALAND MANIFESTO PUBLISHED ON THE CAFE WEBSITE]

 

[For years, I have warned human rights tribunals and others: “When you silence the men of the word, you will have to deal with the men of the sword.” When debate and dissent are silenced by “hate laws” you make violence almost inevitable. Sadly, that seems to be what happened in New Zealand with  the alleged shooter’s killing of some 49 Moslems at two Christ Church area mosques.

 

Such repression has choked immigration and historical debate in almost all West European nations and, of course, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Canada has its notorious “”hate law” — Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code, which saw Don Andrews, an immigration critic, jailed in the 1970s. Brad Love got 18 months for writing fierce but non-threatening letters to 20 MPs and other public officials. Most recently, a humourless Toronto judge in the fine Puritan tradition of banned in Boston, found Dr. James Sears and Leroy St. Germaine guilty for satire targetting Jews and radical feminists. This vile  hate law was enacted after years of Jewish lobby pressure. Jewish lobby groups have stoutly supported it and other anti-free speech measures in Canada. I have seen the human wreckage caused by Richard Warman’s use a decade ago of SEC. 13 (Internet censorship) of the Canadian Human Rights Act — fines, bank accounts looted, lifetime gags and even jail time. Oh, yes, and truth in such “human rights” cases was no defence — only the feelings or perceived possible hatred or contempt directed at privileged minorities.

 

 Many European countries, especially Germany, have laws criminalizing criticism of the Hollywood version of World War II — or the new secular religion of holocaust. Dissent from Islam in Saudi Arabia and you can get lashed and/or imprisoned; dissent from the new religion of holocaust in Germany and you can be beggared and jailed.

 

Here is the manifesto of Brenton Terrant, the alleged shooter in New Zealand. His analysis of the crisis we face is cogent. In Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand, we ARE being invaded and replaced by Third World aliens. This is not the result of having lost a war. It is the result of the cold blooded, White-hating policies of our political elites.  The European indigenous people of Europe and the European founding/settler people of North America, Australia and New Zealand are being replaced by policy. This is planned genocide and will see its fulfillment before the end of this century. Hate laws in Canada have made this mortal threat to us as a people hard even to discuss. Critics of our genocidal immigration policies have been marginalized. Our trust fund kid prime minister who has never passed a Gay Pride Parade without participating refused to meet with a truck convoy of protesters in February because they included some members of the Yellow Vest movement which had criticized our immigration policies. One of several reasons Trudeau reneged on his 2015 election promise to change our electoral system to the more representative proportional representation model was the far of having some White nationalists elected to Parliament. Thus, a significant segment of Canadian political opinion is silenced, marginalized and unrepresented BY POLICY.

 

When you silence dissent, you invite violence.

 

I disagree with the violence indulged in by the shooter. It is not the way to go, but our vile elites have made it all but inevitable

White nationalist endorses Tanya Granic Allen’s Tory leadership campaign

A U.S. civil rights organization describes Paul Fromm’s association as working “against the Canadian Human Rights Commission to defend anti-Semites, racists and Holocaust deniers from persecution ….”

Paul Fromm is director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, which is “dedicated to free speech, immigration reform, and restoring political sanity."
Paul Fromm is director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, which is “dedicated to free speech, immigration reform, and restoring political sanity.”  (RENÉ JOHNSTON / TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO)

Tanya Granic Allen’s campaign to be leader of the Progressive Conservatives has received the endorsement of a self-proclaimed white nationalist.

Paul Fromm tweeted Friday “Check out Tanya Granic Allen for PC Leader. I just joined,” and included a link to a registration form on Granic Allen’s website.

Fromm is director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, which is “dedicated to free speech, immigration reform, and restoring political sanity,” according to its website.

Read more:

PC leadership candidate Tanya Granic Allen knocks better-known rivals, blames low student test scores on sex ed

Opinion | Thomas Walkom: Veer to the right in Ontario PC leadership race risks party’s election chances

Your 5 Ontario PC leadership candidates: A Ford, a Mulroney, an unknown, the former leader and the favourite

The Southern Poverty Law Center, an American civil rights organization that tracks hate groups, describes Fromm’s association as working “against the Canadian Human Rights Commission to defend anti-Semites, racists and Holocaust deniers from persecution under hate crime and human rights legislation.”

You might be interested in

Fromm’s teaching licence in Peel region was revoked in 2007 due to his participation in white supremacist groups and events.

“All of us have a right to participate in the political process,” Fromm told the Star, and said he’s looking to become a member of the PC party.

“I admire someone who comes more or less from the outside, who has taken a strong stand.”

He said the PCs under Patrick Brown “have strayed far, far, far from the feelings of many people in the grassroots,” mentioning among other things the support for “that ridiculous sex-ed program, which I think is offensive to all sorts of people,” referring to the Liberal government’s revamped sexual education curriculum introduced in 2015.

Granic Allen, a social conservative, has been outspoken in her opposition to the new curriculum. Her campaign did not return the Star’s request for comment Saturday regarding Fromm’s support.

The PCs will announce their new leader on March 10.

CAFE & JCCF Granted Intervenor Status for Bill Whatcott’s Motion to Have Oger’s Transgendered Discrimination Complaint Dismissed as Meritless

CAFE & JCCF Granted Intervenor Status for Bill Whatcott’s Motion to Have Oger’s Transgendered Discrimination Complaint Dismissed as Meritless
 
On December 1, the Canadian Association for Free Expression and the Justice Cenre for Constitutional Freedoms , both pro-free speech intervenors in a complaint before the British Columbia Human Rights Commission were granted intervenor status in a special application filed by Mr. Whatcott seeking summary dismissal of the complaint by flamboyant transgendered activist and failed NDP candidate Rona Oger, formerly married and who has fathered two children, but now styles himself a woman and uses the name “Morgane”. Oger filed the complaint in retaliation for Mr. Whatcott’s distributing 1,500 leaflets during last May’s provincial election arguing that, if Oger cannot even get his gender right, he dopes not have the judgement to be a good MLA (Member of the Legislative Assembly.
 

​Ronan Oger                                                                                                    Now “Morgane” Oger

 
CAFE and JCCF were both accepted as intervenors in this motion and have until December 22 to file their submissions, CAFE’s Director Paul Fromm and JCCF attorney Jay Cameron were told today.
 
The following is evangelist and victim Bill Whatcott’s motion, filed December 8.
 
Dear Mr. Rilkoff, Ms Quail and others,
 
I am filing my application to dismiss on the following grounds,
BC Human Rights Code:
 
27 (1) A member or panel may, at any time after a complaint is filed and with or without a
hearing, dismiss all or part of the complaint if that member or panel determines that any of the
following apply:
(b) the acts or omissions alleged in the complaint or that part of the complaint do not
contravene this Code;
(c) there is no reasonable prospect that the complaint will succeed;
And the Word of God:
“He who created them from the beginning made them male and female.”
Matthew 19:5
 
There is a very high threshold which must be established for a finding of ‘hate speech’ under
provincial human rights codes further to the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision
in Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott, [2013] 1 SCR 467, 2013 SCC 11
(CanLII). The flyers are not even remotely close to meeting that threshold.
 
According to the Supreme Court in that case:
The definition of “hatred” set out in Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, 1990 CanLII
26 (SCC), [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892, with some modifications, provides a workable approach to
interpreting the word “hatred” as it is used in legislative provisions prohibiting hate speech.
Three main prescriptions must be followed. First, courts must apply the hate speech prohibitions
objectively. The question courts must ask is whether a reasonable person, aware of the context
and circumstances, would view the expression as exposing the protected group to
hatred. Second, the legislative term “hatred” or “hatred or contempt” must be interpreted as
being restricted to those extreme manifestations of the emotion described by the words
“detestation” and “vilification”. This filters out expression which, while repugnant and
offensive, does not incite the level of abhorrence, delegitimization and rejection that risks
causing discrimination or other harmful effects. Third, tribunals must focus their analysis on the
effect of the expression at issue, namely whether it is likely to expose the targeted person or
group to hatred by others. The repugnancy of the ideas being expressed is not sufficient to
justify restricting the expression, and whether or not the author of the expression intended to
incite hatred or discriminatory treatment is irrelevant. The key is to determine the likely effect of
the expression on its audience, keeping in mind the legislative objectives to reduce or eliminate
discrimination. In light of these three directives, the term “hatred” contained in a legislative hate
speech prohibition should be applied objectively to determine whether a reasonable person,
aware of the context and circumstances, would view the expression as likely to expose a person
or persons to detestation and vilification on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
 
In my submission, simply expressing the opinion that the Complainant is a man does not
possibly rise to the level of hate speech. The fact that the Complainant was a political candidate
and narrowly lost is irrelevant to whether the speech is hate speech under Whatcott SCC 2013.
 
The Tribunal must first ask, “whether a reasonable person, aware of the context and
circumstances, would view the expression as exposing the protected group to hatred.” The flyers
do not expose the Complainant to hatred. The flyers express the opinion that the Complainant is
a man, and that people should not vote for someone who pretends to be a woman for the
purposes of an election. The purpose of the flyers is to bring transparency to the democratic
process – voters deserve transparency. Saying that someone should not vote for a candidate is not
exposing them to “hatred”. The flyers express a protected religious belief that gender is male and
female, and not subject to change. That is not hate speech. That is an opinion, and we have
freedom to have those under section 2(b) of the Charter in this country.
 
Second, the Tribunal must restrict its consideration of the whether the flyers were “hateful” to a
definition of hatred that restricts itself to the one the Supreme Court of Canada outlined
in Whatcott: “extreme manifestations of the emotion described by the words “detestation” and
“vilification””. The flyers do not even begin to approach extreme manifestations described by
“detestation” and “vilification”. The flyers don’t advocate violence or persecution – they advocate
not voting for the Complainant. That does not even remotely qualify as “hate”.
 
Third, the Tribunal must focus on the expression and consider whether it was “likely to
expose the targeted person or group to hatred by others. The repugnancy of the ideas being
expressed is not sufficient to justify restricting the expression, and whether or not the
author of the expression intended to incite hatred or discriminatory treatment is
irrelevant.” The result of the community was predictable: they either told me I was an
idiot, or they ignored me. No one read the flyer and “vilified” the Complainant. No one
acted out against the Complainant. The Complainant has pointed to no harm at all from the
flyers, except to claim that the Complainant lost the election because of them, which is
irrelevant to a consideration of this matter, and no link has been established between the
election result and the flyers, in any event.
 
I could not be successfully sued for defamation for the content of the flyers: the
Complainant fathered two children with a biological woman that the Complainant was
once married or in a common law relationship with. It is not hateful to highlight biological
reality. The Complainant identifies as a woman, but the Complainant differs
physiologically from a biological woman. It is not hate speech to point this out.
 
Lastly, many millions of people in Canada believe and express the biological reality of sex
as being male or female. The statements in the flyers are not unusual. They represent a
common understanding of biology that is both accepted in science and taught in religion.
In Whatcott, the Court delineated the line between protected expression under the Charter
and hate speech:
“In my view, expression that “ridicules, belittles or otherwise affronts the dignity of” does
not rise to the level of ardent and extreme feelings that were found essential to the
constitutionality of s. 13(1) of the CHRA in Taylor. Those words are not synonymous with
“hatred” or “contempt”. Rather, they refer to expression which is derogatory and
insensitive, such as representations criticizing or making fun of protected groups on the
basis of their commonly shared characteristics and practices, or on stereotypes. As
Richards J.A. observed in Owens, at para. 53:
 
Much speech which is self-evidently constitutionally protected involves some measure of
ridicule, belittlement or an affront to dignity grounded in characteristics like race, religion
and so forth. I have in mind, by way of general illustration, the editorial cartoon which
satirizes people from a particular country, the magazine piece which criticizes the social
policy agenda of a religious group and so forth. Freedom of speech in a healthy and robust
democracy must make space for that kind of discourse . . . .
 
I agree. Expression criticizing or creating humour at the expense of others can be
derogatory to the extent of being repugnant. Representations belittling a minority group or
attacking its dignity through jokes, ridicule or insults may be hurtful and offensive.
However, for the reasons discussed above, offensive ideas are not sufficient to ground a
justification for infringing on freedom of expression. While such expression may inspire
feelings of disdain or superiority, it does not expose the targeted group to hatred.”
 
The complaint should be dismissed because there is no reasonable chance it will succeed in
light of the law in regard to hate speech from the Supreme Court of Canada.
Under section 27(1)(b), the Complaint should be dismissed because the flyers are not a
contravention of the Human Rights Code.
 
Finally, the flyers are clearly in harmony with Matthew 19 in the Holy Bible, and I would
like to remind the Chairperson and everyone else reading this; God is the highest arbiter of
right and wrong and one day we will all stand before Him.
 
In Christ’s Service,
Bill Whatcott

Free speech critic of abortion bubble zone silenced at Ontario legislature

And this is MPPs’ idea of democracy. All 3 abortion parties collude to gag anti-abortion protests.

Paul Fromm is the Director, Canadian Association for Free…
YOUTUBE.COM

ERNST ZUNDEL MEMORIAL — TORONTO, AUGUST 16, 2017 — THE VIDEO

 ERNST ZUNDEL MEMORIAL — TORONTO, AUGUST 16, 2017 — THE VIDEO

ERNST ZUNDEL MEMORIAL, TORONTO, August 16, 2017. Friends of the late publisher and holocaust skeptic, Ernst Zundel, and supporters of free speech gather to celebrate a remarkable man.

YOUTUBE.COM
https://youtu.be/50G00Rw9EVE