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.

I Have A Friend in Pennsylvania Who Has My Back

I Have A Friend in Pennsylvania Who Has My Back

 

Some years ago I bought a fancy “Dx” AM radio for my bride to use as she is an avid listener on AM radio. Our new location in Central Pennsylvania, up on a plateau, has provided an unexpected phenomenon for us – at night we experience amazing atmospheric “ducting” which leads to impressively long-range AM radio reception. And it’s consistent all year round. We can pick up Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, Rochester, New York City, Boston, DC and Baltimore, Charlotte NC, West Virginia, and even occasionally, Las Vegas NV!

 

Several Canadian stations roar in loud-and-clear, some in English and others in French. Sure enough, we had a strong signal last night from good old 900-AM, CHML in Hamilton.

 

Last night [actually FRI 6 Sept 2019] she was treated to a lengthy telecast, a monologue from one reporter, talking about your efforts to address the Hamilton City Council and their efforts to prevent you from speaking. The coverage in the discussion was, of course, highly Leftist and in opposition to you. However, from listening closely my wife insists that the story, if followed carefully, would lead an enlightened listener to support your point-of-view, namely that you should be able to address that governance body, no matter how hostile they might be to your message.

 

After about ten minutes of this discussion the station signal faded away. But BRAVO to you for taking on the Pinkos-that-Be in the Ontario Bolshevik power structure, and for sticking to your guns. You now receive serious radio media coverage that can be heard in the Lower 48 States! We certainly support you. If we hear any further radio media coverage of your Free Speech efforts in Hamilton (or anywhere), we will share details. Well Done, Mr. Paul!

 

I also note the gushing satisfaction the Hamilton City Council has after denying both you and Yellow Vest spokesmen from having any say in their “inclusive” government. —  https://globalnews.ca/news/5854833/hamilton-paul-fromm-denied/

More People Outraged at Hamilton City Council Refusing to Hear Paul Fromm on Free Speech

More People Outraged at Hamilton City Council Refusing to Hear Paul Fromm on Free Speech
To Chad Collins (Councillor):
Hi. I read about this today and am very disappointed by council. Paul Fromm is an advocate for freedom of expression and such freedom is ours granted by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and as such is the supreme law of the land. Further spelling out what this means is the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights of which Canada is a signatory. Especially pertinent is article 19: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Also relevant is article 2: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. 

The city and council have acted appallingly of late. The considerable outlay of time and effort to craft by-laws that are clearly designed to block individuals from exercising their Charter rights is inexcusable. The dismissal of a city employee who performed his duties faithfully at the behest of demands for his removal by Marxist hatemongers is no less objectionable. Because of activities the employee may have engaged in on his own time, although entirely within the law, may indicate that he holds or held political views that are not currently fashionable merits his dismissal or coerced resignation makes the city of Hamilton look like a grim Marxist satrapy in the old Soviet Union – only missing a show trial with pro forma confessions of the purged apparatchik.
From these two episodes I was interested in asking just who is driving this Marxist anti-constitutional agenda the city has chosen to pursue and just what is it about these hate-driven steerers of city governance that makes council feel compelled to follow their dictates but today I read of the motion you and councillor Merulla put forward that was unanimously backed by council. I am unimpressed by your virtue signalling although it was predictably favourably painted in the Spec. That is because it is merely doubling down on the same pattern of dismissing the Charter rights of some citizens simply because they hold differing political opinions. In other coverage, the Marxist saturated Spectator lies outright or is deliberately deceptive in their reporting and it seems like many on Council take the narrative as presented by Spec writers as accurate. It is not. Just as an example, the often mentioned clash that happened in Gage Park between Christians and masked Antifa terrorists only descended into violence after the LGBT militant side assaulted the Christians. The Spec first reported the opposite and I wrote to them to correct them referring to the best video recording of the event. I don’t believe my words alone were persuasive to them but in the mentions since then, the Spec doesn’t claim that the Christians started the violence but their phrasing is slick and gives this impression to a reader who does not know better, and so is still deliberately deceptive. You should go and speak to people in the city to get a better idea of the prevailing street level opinions people have towards masked Antifa criminals as well as the rapid influx of 3rd world populations into our communities for which we have not been asked for our consent. If you and council see fit to turn away a citizen who advocates for the founding stock of white Europeans who created a nation, Canada out of the wilderness that was here before them, then in fairness you should also turn away all special interest groups including black lives matter movements, LGBTQ+ groups, and every ethnic group present here. To reserve this shabby treatment for only a backer of rights for whites and no one else is evidence of the racism prevalent in the current Marxist orientation. In fact, Marxism is inherently racist – against whites. Quit it immediately and move to push overt Marxists out of city governance for the reason that their calls to violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of this country are incongruous to any role serving city residents. 

regards,

Rob Janosevic

SUPPORT POURS IN FROM ACROSS ONTARIO FOR PAUL FROMM’S APPEARANCE AT HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL

SUPPORT POURS IN FROM ACROSS ONTARIO FOR PAUL FROMM’S APPEARANCE AT HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL

 

Letter to the Editor

Hamilton Spectator

 

To the Editor:

 

Your article advocating that the Canadian Association for Free Expression be denied the opportunity to submit a brief to Hamilton council is ironic, to say the least.  In today’s editorial you stated: “Governments at all levels and of all stripes need to be very careful that they don’t abuse their positions of trust, including their commitment to be open, responsive and accessible to citizens. That’s central to their commitment to the democratic process and civic engagement”.  If that isn’t doublespeak I don’t know what is.  Let everyone’s opinion hit the table.  Even Paul Fromm’s.  If council or the public don’t agree with an opinion then argue it or ignore it.  On the other hand, perhaps everyone’s point of view is essential to a robust dialogue on any issue at hand.  What skin does the Spectator have in the game to deny a Canadian’s right to express themselves?  Is it to control public opinion?  Sounds like it.

 

Helen Kmera

Belleville ON

 

 

Former Hamilton Mayoralty Candidate Edward Graydon Comes to Paul Fromm’s Defence

Former Hamilton Mayoralty Candidate Edward Graydon Comes to Paul Fromm’s Defence 

I know Paul Fromm personally ,I talk to him probably more than most and in my conversations with him race is never an issue. He never openly talks about or belittles other races .In fact he really is very articulate and interesting to talk with.
I think because of Fake News his reputation and what it is he really stands for is being taken out of context and because Google is really the only way people find out about other people he has been publicly outcasted for holding certain views but in reality I do not have that opinion of him I have never heard him utter hateful opinions and I talk to him regularly. Council believed what was being propagated against him and decided to believe much of the Fake News and decided not to let him speak and I think this was a big mistake.

The Poisonous HAMILTON SPECTATOR Claims Freedom for Itself but Urges City Council to Prevent Paul Fromm Speaking as a Delegation

The Poisonous HAMILTON SPECTATOR Claims Freedom for Itself but Urges City Council to Prevent Paul Fromm Speaking as a Delegation

[The Hamilton Spectator is a far left fake news smear sheet So out to lunch is it that while it practises freedom of the press with impunity — in fact, for all the smear stories they’ve done on me in the past year, they have only once ever called me for an interview –.it wishes for Hamilton City Council to deny me the right to speak for five minutes as a delegation later this month. In Ontario, local councils and school board set aside time at the beginning of their meetings for “delegations”. Normally, a person or group with a concern registers to get on the list and is assigned five minutes to air their views. Back in August, I sought to apply to be heard as a delegation in order to air my concerns as Director of the Canadian Association for Freedom of Expression in light of Council’s instructions to staff in May to explore plans to prevent “hate groups”  (the Yellow Vests and Christian pastors critical of the LGBTQ crowd) from holding protests on public property. This was actually being suggested for Hamilton, not Havana.

 

Here the Spectator says I should be silenced. The two Ottawa incidents to which they refer involved access to the Parliamentary Press Gallery. I had twice booked the Parliamentary Press Gallery for a half hour news conference. I have done this many times. On these two occasions, I was banned entry to the Parliament Buildings where the Press Gallery studio is located. Jason Kenney, the loyal Zionist waterboy was acting on a complaint by the pro-censorship group B’nai Brith. — Paul Fromm]

Editorial: When a white nationalist comes knocking …

Hamilton city council needs to take very seriously its deliberations about whether to allow infamous white nationalist Paul Fromm to delegate at an upcoming meeting.

Opinion06:14 PMHamilton Spectator, September 4, 2019

 

FROMM

Hamilton city council is under no obligation to allow Paul Fromm’s views a soapbox in a public meeting, held in a space owned and paid for by taxpayers. – Rene Johnston , Toronto Star file photo

Governments at all levels and of all stripes need to be very careful that they don’t abuse their positions of trust, including their commitment to be open, responsive and accessible to citizens. That’s central to their commitment to the democratic process and civic engagement.

That is why Hamilton city council needs to take very seriously its deliberations about whether to allow infamous white nationalist Paul Fromm to delegate at an upcoming meeting. Apparently, Fromm is worried about council’s proposed hate-prevention policies. Not surprisingly, he argues they limit free speech. “I don’t think it’s up to city council to play referee on various points of view,” Fromm said in an interview with The Spec’s Andrew Dreschel. “I was shocked I was hearing this in Hamilton, not Havana.”

Fromm knows very well there are already limitations on free speech. For example, your right to say what you want becomes illegal once you use it to make hateful comments about other people or groups. This, among other things, is what Fromm and groups he’s been involved with have done over a long career of far-right activism.

Fromm was a supporter of Ernst Zundel, who denied the Holocaust. Back in 2007, then-Conservative MP Jason Kenney successfully moved a motion to deny Parliamentary admission to Fromm and an associate “to preserve the dignity and integrity of the House.” The same thing happened in 2016 when Fromm tried to call a news conference in Parliament.

These setbacks didn’t deter Fromm. He ran for mayor in Mississauga when he lived there. He later moved to Hamilton and ran for mayor here in the 2018 municipal election. He has been an executive with white supremacist organizations. He has ties to former Ku Klux Klan members David Duke, Don Black and Mark Martin. The National Post described him as “one of Canada’s most notorious white supremacists.” In 2009 he participated in a White Pride march organized by the Aryan Guard, a neo-Nazi gang in Calgary.

Fromm is also, in his own estimation, a bit of an expert on semantics. All of these past activities don’t make him a racist or white supremacist. Rather, he argues, he is a white nationalist, committed to ensuring the “founding peoples” of Canada are not washed away by “waves of mass immigration.” (He’s not referring to founding Indigenous people, by the way. Only the white European ones.)

So, does any of this mean Fromm shouldn’t be welcome as a delegate to city council? The short answer is yes.

Odious as he and his views are, they are not illegal. He is free to hold them, and even to talk about them, provided he can do so in a manner that doesn’t promote hatred against identifiable people or groups.

But city council is under no obligation to allow those views a soapbox in a public meeting, held in a space owned and paid for by taxpayers. To do so would imply a degree, even if only a small one, of legitimacy to opinions based in bigotry.

Back in 2007, Kenney said this about his motion which successfully stopped Fromm from claiming Parliament as his podium: “If they want to get a soapbox and go out in front of the Parliament buildings in this free country, they’re welcome to do so, but this House isn’t going to let them use public, taxpayer-funded resources.”

Kenney was right 12 years ago and city council would be wise to make the same determination about Fromm’s delegation.

Blogger Jeff Goodall Weighs in With Support for Fromm’s Appearance at Hamilton City Council

Blogger Jeff Goodall Weighs in With Support for Fromm’s Appearance at Hamilton City Council  
“Re “Infamous white nationalist Paul Fromm wants to address city council on free speech” (Andrew Dreschel Aug 31): I particularly notice Councillor Sam Merulla’s statement that he opposes Fromm’s bid to address council because “he’s a known white nationalist.” I see also that Fromm “happily agrees” to being a white nationalist. And what on earth is wrong with that? We have Black Lives Matter advocating for blacks, and any number of advocacy groups acting on behalf of different races and nationalities. Indeed, Canada’s foreign policy decisions are often based on domestic political considerations, rather than what is best for Canada… why should the people who founded this country not be allowed to have and pursue their own interests? Why the double standard?”
Cheers,
Jeff Goodall
https://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/9575693-andrew-dreschel-infamous-white-nationalist-paul-fromm-wants-to-address-city-council-on-free-speech/

Infamous white nationalist Paul Fromm wants to address city council on free speech

Andrew Dreschel: Infamous white nationalist Paul Fromm wants to address city council on free speech 

‘I think his track record speaks for itself and it’s not welcome at city hall’

OPINION 02:46 PM by Andrew Dreschel  Hamilton Spectator

 

Paul Fromm

Paul Fromm, an avowed white nationalist and infamous far-right activist, is asking to publicly address councillors over his concerns their proposed hate prevention policies are limiting free speech. – Hand out

After a summer sizzling with hate issues, a new hot potato has landed in city council’s lap.

Paul Fromm, an avowed white nationalist and infamous far-right activist, is asking to publicly address councillors over his concerns their proposed hate prevention policies are limiting free speech.

Councillors will debate Wednesday whether to accept or reject Fromm’s delegation request.

They also have to decide whether to grant delegation status to Lisa Thompson, a member of the Hamilton yellow-vest group, which protests in front of city hall every Saturday.

Fromm, a Hamilton resident, says he was “shocked” by some of the hate prevention initiatives council floated earlier this summer in the wake of the Pride brawl at Gage Park and ongoing yellow-vest demonstrations.

“I don’t think it’s up to city council to play referee on various points of view,” Fromm said in an interview.

“I was shocked I was hearing this in Hamilton, not Havana.”

sto

Fromm’s request lands after months of controversy, which saw: fisticuffs at the Gage Park Pride celebrations between white nationalist/homophobic protesters and Pride supporters/anarchists; criticisms of police response to the clash; the swarming of Mayor Fred Eisenberger’s home by LGBTQ+ activists/anarchists; and a city hall investigation ending with the departure of city IT worker Marc Lemire, who was linked to a former white nationalist group.

Against that background, the dilemma Fromm presents councillors is plain as a red flag.

By allowing him to address the general issues committee, they’ll almost certainly be lambasted for giving a platform to his ultraright agenda. But by rejecting his request, they run the risk of being criticized for suppressing free speech.

The mayor is well aware of how tricky the situation is. After all, he spent a good part of the summer trying to build bridges with the LGBTQ+ community after being accused of responding indifferently to its concerns.

Eisenberger told The Spectator that denying Fromm the five minutes of speaking time allotted to delegates could become a “bigger issue” than having the committee chair simply police his comments to ensure he’s doesn’t say “hateful things.”

But in the end, Eisenberger stated the obvious: the request is open to consideration by council.

Coun. Jason Farr is also cautious. Recognizing council is walking a “fine line,” he expects a “healthy debate.”

For his part, Coun. Sam Merulla bluntly states he won’t support Fromm’s bid because he’s a known white nationalist. He believes council should refuse to listen to him.

“If he wants to appeal it, he has every right to. But I think his track record speaks for itself, and it’s something not welcome at city hall.”

Fromm, 70, is the director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, which bills itself as a political group committed to free speech, immigration reform and “political sanity.”

In 2018, he ran for mayor of Hamilton, racking up 706 votes. In 2007, the Ontario College of Teachers took away his teaching license for unprofessional conduct outside the classroom because he participated in white supremacist events and held beliefs contrary to tolerance and multiculturalism.

He previously supported Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel, who was deported back to Germany in 2005 after the courts judged him a security threat.

Fromm denies being a white supremacist but happily agrees he’s a white nationalist.

“As a white nationalist, I do not want to see the European founding/settler people of this country swamped, and that’s what’s happening with mass immigration over the last 40 years.”

Fromm says a lot of provocative things.

He says attempting to prevent hate speech is “like trying to prevent the wind.”

He says hate speech is a “term of abuse” that doesn’t apply until someone has been charged and convicted of it.

And he says if council won’t listen to his concerns, it’s a “sad comment on democracy” but indicative of a time when people are “terrified to open their mouths.”

Whatever council decides to do, the debate may be the torrid capper to this long, hot summer.

Andrew Dreschel’s commentary usually appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. adreschel@thespec.com @AndrewDreschel

905-526-3495

Andrew Dreschel’s commentary usually appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. adreschel@thespec.com @AndrewDreschel

905-526-3495

Recent articles by Andrew Dreschel

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

 

 

July 22, 2019

 

The Editor,

STONEY CREEK  NEWS,

 

Dear Sir:

 

Your editorial “What is the Greater Good?” (July 18, 2019) deals with the dilemma of what Council should do or can do to curb protests on public property.

 

Actually, there should be no dilemma. The right to protest or to present grievances to the monarch or ruler goes back to Magna Carta. As well, the Charter guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of association or assembly and freedom of religion. A variety of groups, some of whose views some citizens find offensive, have protested recently. That’s their absolute right. Council has busainess even to consider restrictions

 

Despite the views of some snowflakes, we enjoy no right not to be offended. Critics frequently denounce those they dislike with  terms  like” hate speech” and “hate groups” . These weaponized words are a lot of noise without substance. “Wilfully promoting hate” against certain groups is a criminal offence in Canada. It is narrowly construed. To my knowledge, none of the participants on various sides of these protests has ever been charged with or convicted of hate. The accusation of “hate” usually tells us more about the accuser’s emotions than the words criticized. “Hate speech”  means speech the accuser hates.

 

The city does have a legitimate role in ensuring that the protests are peaceful. Police should continue to observe these protests and, where rival factions show up, make certain that the two sides are kept apart — say on opposite sides of the street — so that both can exercize their right to wave their signs or flags and make their views known.

 

 

Council should go back to dealing with important issues like fixing our deplorable roads and leave free speech alone.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Paul Fromm

Director