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

Look at Which Organized Group is Seeking to Squelch Free Speech … Again!

 Look at Which Organized Group is Seeking to Squelch Free Speech … Again!

Frederick Fromm's photo.

Jewish Groups Denounce Choice of Antisemite to Headline ‘Freedom to Read Week’ Event in Toronto

FEBRUARY 14, 2016 9:20 PM 35 COMMENTS

Author:

Self-described anti-Zionist author and journalist Max Blumenthal. Photo: Wikipedia.

Two major Jewish groups gently ripped into the Canadian branch of the international organization PEN — which campaigns on behalf of writers persecuted or imprisoned for expressing themselves freely – for inviting a highly controversial author to headline an event it is co-sponsoring, theCanadian Jewish News reported on Sunday.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) and the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center asked PEN why it is headlining the event, to be held on Feb. 24 at the Toronto Reference Library, with self-described “anti-Zionist” Max Blumenthal, whose fringe positions on Israel have earned him the label of antisemite.

Blumenthal, author of The 51 Day War: Ruin and Resistance in Gaza and Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel, was invited by PEN Canada, in conjunction with Independent Jewish Voices and Another Story Bookshop (as part of “Freedom to Read Week”) to be the star attraction at the event, titled “Embattled Truths: Reporting on Gaza.” His co-panelist will be Toronto Star foreign affairs reporter Olivia Ward.

“We thought this is an odd choice,” CIJA spokesperson Martin Sampson told the CJN. “Why would they do that? Why would they put their reputation at risk by associating with Blumenthal? I think his extreme positions disqualify him for being a rational, reasonable contributor in the discourse about Israel.”

Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center CEO Avi Benlolo told the CJN: “Max Blumenthal represents the radical left’s extremist belief that Israel is the embodiment of all evil and has no right to exist. His most recent book – [which has been] dubbed the ‘I Hate Israel Handbook’ – supports the mainstreaming of growing antisemitic attitudes by conflating Israel with Nazi Germany. While shunned by conventional media outlets, the book is popular on major antisemitic, neo-Nazi and conspiracy theory websites such as Stormfront and David Duke’s Rense, where his work is used to promote anti-Jewish hate. I’m not sure what PEN is trying to achieve by giving Blumenthal a podium from which to spew his hatred, but if its goal is to contribute to increasing antisemitism in Canada, then I guess they will succeed.”

According to the CJN, PEN spokesperson Brendan de Caires responded by saying that the group’s mandate is to “raise difficult subjects… We are a free speech organization. We embrace an open exchange of ideas.” And “the whole premise of our discussion is that this [Gaza] is a hot topic.”

De Caires added, “We have no stake in the content of what Mr. Blumenthal says. [But] we support his right to say it.”

According to CJN, Toronto Public Library stakeholder relations manager Ana-Maria Critchley said that, in spite of the controversy, the event will be going ahead as planned. “Blumenthal has been invited very clearly not because of his personal views, but to speak on his experience as a journalist,” she said.

Max Blumenthal’s name came to the fore recently, when the latest batch of emails released from the server of Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton revealed correspondence with her former adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, the author’s father. In these exchanges, Blumenthal senior sent Clinton links to a number of anti-Israel articles written by his son.

Arthur Topham’s Political Beliefs May Just Be Illegal

Arthur Topham’s Political Beliefs May Just Be Illegal by Eve Mykytyn

November 29, 2015 by  Leave a Comment

Screen Shot 2015-11-07 at 4.51.44 PM

Arthur Topham’s Political Beliefs May Just Be Illegal
The Extraordinary Trial of Arthur Topham: Part 3
by Eve Mykytyn / November 29th, 2015

On November 12, 2015 Arthur Topham was convicted of inciting hatred against a racial group, the Jewish people. Mr. Topham maintains a website, RadicalPress.com, in which he publishes and comments upon various documents. These documents include The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, various anti-Zionist texts, and a tract entitled Germany Must Perish!, first published in 1941 and then satirized by Mr. Topham as Israel Must Perish!.

Mr. Topham’s defense rested primarily on the theory that his writing was not directed at Jews as a race or religion, but rather at the politics espoused by a number of Jewish people. The best discussion of this topic is by Gilad Atzmon, contained in his book, The Wandering Who?. The basic take away for considering the implications of Mr. Topham’s criminal conviction is that some people conflate Judaism as a religion, an ethnic heritage AND with a political view, not always consistent, that generally favors Israel’s perceived benefit.

Canada has a lobby entitled Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) that lobbies the Canadian government on behalf of Israel. Mr. Rudner, who had lodged various complaints about Mr. Topham in the past and was the Crown’s expert in Mr. Topham’s case, has worked for CIJA or its predecessor for 15 years. So the Crown relied upon the testimony of a man who lobbies for Israel (clearly a political entity) for proof of anti Semitic content and potential harm to Jewish people. His appearance in tiny Quesnel is testimony to the political importance that his organization places on silencing Mr. Topham. (The original witness scheduled to testify, Mr. Farber was a former colleague of Rudner’s, and apparently the two are close enough that Mr. Rudner’s written testimony was an exact duplicate of Mr. Farber’s original.)

Since Mr. Topham was accused of anti-Semitism, let’s look at the term. The quote below is from the Holocaust Encyclopedia, published and maintained by the United States Holocaust Museum so it is probably safe to assume that this is a standard definition.

“The word antisemitism means prejudice against or hatred of Jews. The Holocaust, the state-sponsored persecution and murder of European Jews by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945, is history’s most extreme example of antisemitism. In 1879, German journalist Wilhelm Marr originated the term antisemitism, denoting the hatred of Jews, and also hatred of various liberal, cosmopolitan, and international political trends of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries often associated with Jews. The trends under attack included equal civil rights, constitutional democracy, free trade, socialism, finance capitalism, and pacifism.”

Interesting that, in the first paragraph of its section on anti-Semitism, the encyclopedia blends together the concepts of ‘hatred of the Jews’ with opposition to various political and social movements generally associated with Jews. This is puzzling. Is it anti-Semitism to oppose socialism or is it anti-Semitic to oppose finance capitalism? While one could oppose both, it would be impossible to espouse either view without rejecting the other. I assume the author did not intend to imply that opposition to socialism, for instance, was it anti-Semitic even if such opposition was from a fellow Jew.

I bring this up because this is precisely what I believe happened in Mr. Topham’s case. Mr. Topham was charged with two counts of inciting hatred over different periods of time. The jury found him guilty on the first count and not guilty on the second. Of course there are many possible explanations for a split verdict (none of which the jury is allowed to discuss even after trial without committing what the judge termed a ‘criminal’ offense). The observers, including myself, tended to believe that the discrepancy in the verdicts was a result of the text Germany Must Perish! and its satirization by Mr. Topham in Israel Must Perish!, a text that appeared on his website during the period for which Mr. Topham was found guilty.

The original text of Germany Must Perish! was written in 1941 by Theodore Kaufman, an American Jewish man. The text was originally self-published, but was apparently advertised and reviewed by the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and Time magazine. In any case, the publication was well known enough to have been read in Germany and was cited by Hitler and Goebbels as evidence of the bad intention of the Jews. The book is horrendous. Its semi-literate ravings are a ridiculous indictment of the German people and their warlike nature. Kaufman advocates sterilization of the Germans as the only possible remedy. At best, the author is confusing all Germans with Nazis, but that is not what the book says. Mr. Topham’s satire in which he substitutes the words ‘Israel’ for Germany and ‘Zionists’ for Germans helps to make the original text comprehensible. The satire hopefully provides some insight into how these words might have been viewed by Germans in 1941. The proof that the works were effective but the satire was not understood, is that Mr. Topham faced criminal charges for aping Kaufman’s words.

In its case, the Crown made the point that Israel Must Perish! was a horrible text. The Crown argued that the fact that the words were originally written by a Jewish man to indict the Germans did not kosher the text. “Jews,” the Crown said, “could write anti-Semitic things too.” Presumably her next case will be against a Jew for inciting hatred against the Jewish people. Mr. Topham was making a political point. I believe he was trying to convey the idea that Israel and Zionists could seem very much like Germans and Nazism in 1941. It is not necessary to agree with Mr. Topham’s point to understand it.

If I am right and it was this text that caused Mr. Topham’s conviction, then that is an important indictment against Canada’s admirable attempts to limit ‘hate’ speech while allowing freedom of political speech. Mr. Topham’s criminal conviction may well have been the result of a misunderstanding that Mr. Topham was criticizing Israel and Zionism and not Jews as a race. Germany and Israel are political constructs, Germans may not be, but Zionists, or those who support establishment of the state of Israel are, by definition, espousing a political cause. So, Mr. Topham criticized the political cause of the Zionists. Is there a way in which Canada’s laws would allow Mr. Topham’s political views to find an outlet? Perhaps Canada ought to make criticism of Israel legally off limits so that Canadians may adjust their behavior accordingly.

Read Part 1 and 2.
Eve Mykytyn graduated from Boston University School of Law and was admitted to bar of the state of New York. Read other articles by Eve.