Zionist-connected Judge Recuses Herself, Crown Takes Over Prosecution & Singer Alison Chabloz Case Adjourns Until June

Zionist-connected Judge Recuses Herself, Crown Takes Over Prosecution & Singer Alison Chabloz Case Adjourns Until June
LONDON. Satirical chanteuse and song-writer Alison Chabloz’  case  seems to be a test as radical Zionist censors seek to create a precedent in Britain for gagging critics on the Internet. She is charged under a hazy law the Communications Act of 2003, which was meant to regulate commercial broadcasting, for You Tubes of satirical songs about the holocaust.  She was charged for improper use of the public communications network for having broadcast “grossly offensive” material in such songs as (((Survivors))) with lyrics such as, ‘Now Auschwitz, holy temple, is a theme park just for fools, the gassing zone a proven hoax, indoctrination rules.”
Inline image 1
Initially, Jewish complaints were dismissed by the Crown Prosecution Services (CPS) as non-actionable. Then, the well-funded “charity” the Campaign Against Anti-semitism initiated a rarely-used private prosecution complete with pricey Jewish lawyers. In December, Alison Chabloz was gagged by way of bail conditions that forbad her posting any racist or anti-semitic or “grossly offensive” material on the Internet or naming her tormenter complainers, Gideon Falter of the Campaign Against Anti-semitism. [Canadian political prisoner Arthur Topham was similarly prohibited from mentioning the names of those who complained and dragged him into court and inflicted tens of thousands of dollars of costs on this intrepid Internet warrior. The court-coddled complainers were Victoria B’nai Brith operative Harry Abrams and chronic complaint filer Richard Warman.]
Miss Chabloz’s legal team then raised the issue of “reasonable apprehension of bias” on the part of the judge, Baroness Emma Arbuthnot. She had been part of a paid trip to Israel along with her husband, a former Tory MP, who headed Conservative Friends of Israel (a cheering team for another country). The day before the trial, Baroness Arbuthnot quietly withdrew and was replaced by an experienced jurist Judge Zani.
On March 7, after prolonged Zionist lobbying, the CPS took over the prosecution. Now, a whole new team of lawyers was seized of the file. Almost predictably, despite having had the Chabloz file for months, the CPS sought an adjournment on the eve of the trial, needing more preparation time. The adjournment was granted on March 22 — two days before the trial was to commence.
On June 23, there will be purely legal arguments. One key argument deals with jurisdiction. The impugned posting was made in Switzerland. Do U.K. courts even have jurisdiction?
Should rulings on June 23 go against the defence, Alison Chaloz’s trial will proceed on July 17.

Topham Gagged & 6 Month Conditional Sentence: One More Victim of Zionist Thought Control

Topham Gagged & 6 Month Conditional Sentence: One More Victim of Zionist Thought Control
Asked whether he had anything to say before sentencing, Arthur Topham made a statement that will ring through Canadian history about the nature of free speech and the motivations of an extremely moral and honest man.. He posted what he had as a critic of Zionism, not out of malice or hatred, but driven by a moral imperative to warn people of a perceived danger. ““I felt that I had a duty as a Canadian citizen to alert the general public of an imminent threat … the interests of the Jewish lobby,” said Topham in court March 13, according to the CBC. 

Arthur Topham’s 10 year ordeal of harassment for being a strong critic of Zionism, ended in a Quesnel courtroom when he was sentenced, having been convicted in November 2015 on one count of violating Canada’s notorious “hate law” Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code, as a result of postings highly critical of Zionism and organized Jewry. Ironically, the charge revolved around books readily available from mainline online booksellers.. The Internet dissident became technically another political prisoner in Canada’s sordid attack on free speech. Amnesty International defines a political prisoner as a person punished solely for the non-violent expression of his political, religious or cultural views.
Judge Bruce Butler sentenced Mr. Topham to a six month suspended sentence during which he must reside at his home, refrain from alcohol, report to his probation officer and not post anything on the Internet. After that, he faces two years of probation. On March 10, he shut down his massive  RadicalPress.com website, the contents of which, we assume will be mirrored by others in less repressive lands than Canada.
Inline image 1
CAFE Director Paul Fromm with political prisoner Arthur Topham in Quesnel, BC
“In a sense, the thought control freaks got part of what they wanted — the silencing of this dissident,” said Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression which had backed Mr. Topham during the first legal assault by complainant Harry Abrams,a complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission under the now repealed Sec. 13. CAFE continued to back him when Abrams, a B’nai Brith spokesman in Victoria, teamed up with chronic Ottawa complainer Richard Warman who complained to the British Columbia “hate squad” which led to the  Sec. 319 charges.
In sentencing Mr. Topham, Judge Butler rejected Crown submissions for a stiffer sentence and 200 hours of community work. The judge also rejected allegations that Mr. Topham indirectly advocated violence. The CBC (March 13, 2017) reported: “One piece that Topham called ‘satire’ advocated the forced sterilization of all Jews. ‘He does not call for violence; his views were political satire,’Butler told the sentencing hearing. ‘It is not his intent to indirectly incite violence.’ Butler ruled that Topham deliberately used the internet to disseminate anti-Semitic information but said the man was not calling for violence.” The satire in question was Israel Must Perish, a parody Mr. Topham wrote of a hideous blueprint for genocide Germany Must  Perish, written in 1941 by an American Jew named Theodore Kaufman, calling for the mass sterilization of German Jews after the war, an act which would eliminate the Germans as a people within a few decades.
No one was happy with the sentence. Free speech supporters see the gagging of Arthur Topham as one more atrocity committed under Pierre Trudeau’s fadulent Charter of minority special rights and diminished Majority freedoms.
Defence lawyer Barclay Johnson sadly observed: “The difference between Canada and the Soviet gulags is only one of degree. The communists put dissidents into a physical prison. The gag order is a psychological; prison imposed to enforce a multicultural society. The Charter is little more than a fine document to be hung on an office wall. It looks good. However, judges have repeatedly gutted promised rights like freedom of speech and invented rights not mentioned, like same sex marriage.”
The mainstream media, even in British Columbia, were strangely silent. “The Jewish lobby doesn’t like this sentence,” remarked Dr. James Sears publisher of the satirical YOUR WARD NEWS, another target of arch- complainer Richard Warman.’s  “They were hoping for a harsher sentence and, then, the controlled media would have crowed about a ‘Nazi’ tongue-lashed by a judge and sent away for a long prison term.”
Their victory over the former teacher,  placer miner and publisher. after a decade of attack seemed like a mouthful of bitter ashes to B’nai Brith. “B’nai Brith Canada, which had alerted the RCMP to Topham’s activities back in 2007, said it was “strongly disappointed” with the sentencing. In a statement, Michael Mostyn, CEO, described the sentence as “a mere slap on the wrist which will do little to protect Canadian Jews or preserve the multicultural mosaic of our society. Mr. Topham is a committed and unrepentant Jew-hater, who persisted in publishing lurid anti-Semitic content on his website throughout this legal process,’ Mostyn continued. ‘Canada’s laissez-fair approach to hate crimes continues to fail minority groups and puts them at increased risk of attacks against their lives or property.’ Mostyn said the timing of the lax sentence was especially disturbing ‘as Canada’s Jewish community reels from a series of bomb threats against our community centres, inspired by the same hateful ideology that drives Mr. Topham.’” (Canadian Jewish News, March 14, 2017)

University of Lethbridge Rats Out Prof. Hall to Alberta Human Rights Commission & Suspends Him With Pay On January 11

University of Lethbridge Rats Out Prof. Hall to Alberta Human Rights Commission & Suspends Him With Pay


On January 11, dissident University of Lethbridge professor, Tony Hall, who had been suspended without pay since early October, for his views critical of Israel widely circulated on the Internet, has now been suspended with pay, but his own university is filing a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission — a mortal enemy of free speech. If found guilty by a body with loosey-goosey rules of evidence or threshholds for guilt, Prof. Hall could then, in the university’s view be legitimately fired, thus doing an end-run around academic freedom.

s: “Inline image 2
Professor Hall reports: “”This new communication is dated Dec. 19 but it was delivered to my door yesterday[ Is the mail really THAT slow? PF]
One of the agendas of Dr. Mahon and those behind them is to overthrow the authority of the collective agreement between faculty and administration (Handbook) by seeming to leave it to the Alberta Human Rights Board to justify my suspension outside the Handbook provisions. A quick way to describe the plan would be to identify it with the objective of union busting.
Here’s the provision at issue from the Alberta Post-Secondary Learning Act, 2003
(3) Subject to any existing agreement, a president may, in the president’s discretion, suspend from duty and privileges any member of the academic staff at the university and shall forthwith report the president’s action and the reasons for it 2003 Section 23 Chapter P-19.5 POST-SECONDARY LEARNING ACT 21 (a) to the board, and (b) to the executive committee of the general faculties council. 2003 cP-19.5 s22;2008 c25 
To some it seems obvious that the “existing agreements” that the Handbook and tenure are “existing agreements” that limit presidential powers to “suspend from duty and privileges any member of the academic staff at the university.” 

The Canadian Press (January 16, 2017) reported: “The University of Lethbridge says it is lodging a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission about a

longtime professor accused of espousing anti-Semitic views.

Anthony Hall was suspended without pay in October following comments he made in online articles and videos suggesting there was a Zionist connection to the 9/11 attacks and that the events of the Holocaust should be up for debate.”

Thus, it’s quite clear that Prof. Hall’s crime is suggesting an Israeli connection to 9/11 and saying that the so-called holocaust should be debatable. And shouldn’t it?

The Canadian Press report continues: “From the findings of that assessment, the board has decided to proceed with a complaint to the Alberta Human Rights Commission against Dr. Hall for publishing statements, alone and in collaboration with others, that could be considered hateful, contemptuous and discriminatory,’ it said in a statement Monday.” Shockingly, the university assails academic freedom and seeks to get a kangaroo court to do its dirty work.

Prof. Hall is receiving some academic support: “Hall said the complaint is a way for administration to manoeuvre around its collective agreement with faculty.

‘It represents an enormous effort to change the landscape of higher education in Canada,’ he said. ‘I was ripped form the classroom mid-term in October and my students were deprived of the course they chose and the professor they chose.’

Both the University of Lethbridge Faculty Association and the Canadian Association of University Teachers criticized Hall’s suspension before any official finding of wrongdoing.”

Not surprisingly, the League for Human Rights (but not free speech) of B’nai Brith, Professor Hall’s chief tormenter, whose complaints led to his present persecution, is delighted: “Amanda Hohmann with B’nai Brith Canada said she’s pleased with how the university has handled the situation and says the reinstatement of Hall’s pay isn’t a vindication. Hohmann said Hall’s appearance earlier this month on a radio show posted on Stormfront — a white nationalist website that describes itself as a “community of racial realists and idealists” — shows the complaint is not an assault on the institution of tenure, as Hall argues, but a defence of human rights.

‘Instead of being repentant or apologizing for his behaviour, he’s doubled down and he’s gone even further down the rabbit hole of anti-Semitism,’ said Hohmann.”

So, silencing Professor Hall is “defending human rights”?

the censors have gone mad!

One wonders whether the Knights of Columbus could get a university to fire a professor who took issue with Catholic doctrine? Didn’t think so!

Paul Fromm







Anthony Hall, a University of Lethbridge professor, co-hosts a weekly YouTube show called False Flag Weekly News.

Anthony Hall, a University of Lethbridge professor, co-hosts a weekly YouTube show called False Flag Weekly News. (B’nai Brith/YouTube)

York University Promises B’nai Brith to Ban YOUR WARD NEWS on Campus

York University Promises B’nai Brith to Ban YOUR WARD NEWS on Campus

YOUR WARD NEWS is a scrappy satirical newspaper with over 300,000 copies per issue which is published in the East End of Toronto. Its stiletto cartoons and articles target the politically correct like the radical environmentalists, Ontario’s free spending lesbian premier Wynne, local leftist politicians, Black Lives Matter, and two of its most determined critics, Liberal Party attack dog Warren Kinsella, and Ottawa lawyer, Richard Warman. The radical left has, over the past several years, done everything to shut them down. Their windows at their Main St. office have been broken repeatedly. There have been numerous complaints to the Toronto Police Service “hate squad” (the thought police) and there  is an ongoing investigation as to whether to charge them for publishing “hate” against privileged minorities. Complaints were made to Canada Post. The local of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, at one point in 2015t, refused to deliver the papers because the “hate” was too hot for their prissy fingers. Then, Richard Warman, a champion complaint filer, complained  to the Canadian Human Rights Commission against Canada Post which continued to deliver the paper. Last June, Canada’s Newfie Minister of Supply and Procurement Judy Foote, took away editor Dr. James Sears’ mailing rights. That totalitarian move (yes, in Canada, not North Korea) is now being appealed.
The latest assault on the embattled tabloid, Canada’s most spirited satirical publication since the demise of Frank Magazine, came as York University hopped to it when B’nai Brith complained and promised to ban distribution of the tabloid on campus. A November 3 statement from B’nai Brith gloated: “York University has vowed to stop the circulation of Your Ward News – a publication deemed by various human rights groups as anti-semitic, racist and homophobic – after copies of it were widely distributed on York’s Keele campus.   A spokesperson at the York University President’s Office told B’nai Brith Canada that it ‘will take appropriate steps to ensure that this publication is not being distributed or delivered to locations on campus.’ B’nai Brith alerted the York administration after copies of Your Ward News were found on official newsstands scattered throughout the Keele campus, including the Lassonde School of Engineering and the Central Square Complex.”On so many levels, the York Administration’s decision is disappointing and pathetic. Even if YWN were “anti-semitic, racist and homophobic”, so what? These are terms of abuse by those who don’t like to be criticized. These are political points of view. A university should be a forum for discussion and debate about ideas not a politically correct indoctrination factory, as many White students say York has become. The lack of commitment of the university to freedom of the press or the marketplace of ideas is scandalous.
The B’nai Brith statement insists YWN ” ‘has no legitimacy as a news publication, there is no reason for it to be distributed on campuses,’ said Amanda Hohmann, National Director of B’nai Brith’s League for Human Rights. ‘We are glad to see that York University has taken the appropriate step of removing it, and freeing up space to display legitimate publications of value for the student body.’” The arrogant thought police at B’nai Brith insist on determining who is a “legitimate” news publication. And, sadly, York University has bent to this outside pressure group. [However, exactly what “appropriate” (there’s that politically correct catch-all term) measures can be used to stop distribution on campus, no one seems to know.] I was recently interviewed as part of Global News’s smear attack on Evalion  (See  story above.) Interviewer Christina Stevens asked why it should be important to identify who is a Jew. Evalion did a video offering her thoughts on that issue. I said it was important as the Jewish lobby, as opposed to some individual Jews, regularly seeks to restrict the rights of other Canadians to talk. This being a case in point, You don’t hear of Italians or Icelanders lobbying for restrictions on free speech
As if to make my point, the B’nai Brith statement boasts:  “York University, which has a large Jewish student population, has been roiled by allegations of anti-semitism for years. In September, York dismissed lab technician Nikolaos Balaskas after B’nai Brith exposed his anti-semitic posts on social media.” So, after B’nai Brith went whining to the York Administration about the political views of one their employees, the poor wretch was promptly fired. This is not satirical but the chutzpah would be worthy of YWN‘s zany writers, B’nai Brith actually bills itself as practising “grass roots human rights advocacy”. Well, only if “human rights” does not include freedom of speech and freedom of the press. — Paul Fromm

York U Vows to Stop Circulation of Antisemitic Publication

Screenshot of Your Ward News

HARRY ABRAMS (Complainant in Arthur Topham Case) SPEAKS

HARRY ABRAMS (Complainant in Arthur Topham Case) SPEAKS

Harry Abrams is the Victoria voice of B’nai Brith one of Canada’s leading anti-free speech groups and, as defence lawyer Barclay Johnson pointed out at the recent Arthur Topham trial, a lobby for a foreign power — Israel. So, people associated with a lobby group dedicated to supporting a foreign power make judicial war on a Canadian critic of that power.
 In 2007, when Arthur Topham turned the focus of his website radicalpress.com — check it out before the thought police order it taken down — he almost immediately came under attack by thought control freak Harry Abrams. He launched a “human rights complaint” under the notorious Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. CAFE intervened on his behalf. However, before a tribunal could be convened the section was repealed. In 2012, Abrams, now joined by the champion human rights complaint filer under the old Sec. 13, Richard Warman, filed a complaint with the B.C. Hate Squad, fortuitously headed up by another free speech foe and former London thought police cop Terry Wilson. Needless to say, he hopped to it and Arthur was “investigated” and charged under Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code; to wit, “willfully promoting hatred against a privileged minority” — in this case Jews.
Neither Warman nor Abrams bothered to attend the 12-day trial (October 26 to November 12) resulting from their complaint. They just do their mischief and let the cops and courts inflict maximum pain on dissidents.
The following material appeared November 15 on the Anti-Racist Canada website. Here Abrams thanks all the people who helped him persecute Arthur Topham, including B’nai Brith lawyers like Marvin Kurz and Anita Bromberg. Poor Richard Warman hasn’t received the kudos Abrams feels he deserves in the judicial takedown of Arthur Topham. [Boo, hoo, we’ve run out of Kleenex.]
Frederick Fromm's photo.
Free Speech martyr Arthur Topham
Abrams boasts of a number of campaigns to shut other people down. He’s currently trying to impoverish Vancouver Buddhist lecturer Brian Ruhe for publishing historical revisionist videos. He boasts (elsewhere) of contacting Ruhe’s employers and getting him fire.
Erroneously, Abrams says that the evil book Germany Must Perish was obscure WW II Allied propaganda that no one had ever heard of. It was not Allied propaganda. It was written by a U.S. Jew Theodore Kaufman and was his blueprint for the eradication of Germans after WW II by mass sterilization. Abrams knew  Arthur Topham’s take-off on this book, Israel Must Perish was a satire. He said so, the Arthur Topham trial learned, when he was interviewed by Det. Const. Wilson. The fiery passages Abrams quotes are from this satire. They are meant to criticize the book  Germany Must Perish, not seriously to suggest genocide of Jews. Det. Const. Wilson said he’d been aware of Germany Must Perish. Of course, as Germans are not a privileged minority, this book has never been the subject of prosecution in Canada.
More than ever, free men and free women need liberation from thought control laws like Sec. 319, Canada’s “hate law.”
Repeal all hate laws!
Paul Fromm

 Harry Abrams also writes the following on the subject:

Arthur Topham – Guilty!

Undated ( 1970’s?) photo posted to Topham’s Facebook page

“…Topham’s bizarre antisemitic conspiracy theories and his repeated demonization of the Jewish people are far beyond the limits of what civil society would consider to be protected speech. While we recognize that freedom of speech is the cornerstone of a free and democratic society, Topham’s postings crossed a line when he began to actively assert the need for genocide of the Jewish people…” – B’nai Brith Canada

Harry thank you for bringing Topham to everyone’s attention. Here the system has worked as it should. – Marvin Kurz

These above are my 2 favourite headlines so far. The decision just didn’t seem to sink in for me until I finally could  read it in the national mainstream news, and for this once, I think that the main outlets covering the story, both understood and conveyed the significance of why this needed to be done, and how freedom of speech in a democracy can never be totally open-ended…or else we risk losing our civilization.

More wherefores and why-fores in a moment, but first I would like to offer some acknowledgements and thanks.

Detective Terry Wilson and Corporal Normandie Levas and the BC Hate Crimes Team. Without these skilled, principled and above all, dedicated Peace officers, we never would have had this show. Det. Wilson, who led the investigation would have been the first (after myself and the B’nai Brith legal ensemble) to  recognize the complaint for what it was, and make the critical decision to proceed,  knowing with certainty that  we had  a textbook  criminal case.

Richard Warman of Ottawa.   See:    www.richardwarman.ca

It’s been something of a shame that Richard hasn’t received much notice in all of the coverage I’ve seen so far, because he also filed  similar complaints all along.  I’d like to see him receive a few laurel leaves. He’s taken personal risks and worked very hard and has been an admirable steadfast colleague for many years.

B’nai Brith Canada A special thank you to Anita Bromberg, then in-house lawyer at the office in Toronto, and of course legal counsels Marvin Kurz in Brampton, Ont. and David Matas in Winnipeg, Man.,  both of whom oversaw my work and preparation, pro bono.

Antiracism Experts: Alan Dutton  of Vancouver and Helmut Harry Loewen in Winnipeg. Thank you fellows!! For all of your support and years of commiseration!

http://anti-racistcanada.blogspot.ca/     This unique collective has been of invaluable assistance to all Canadians in getting the word out  and archiving important developments and files on key personalities. See  their sections on Paul Fromm and Doug Christie too…

Why Topham and Radicalpress.com?

By 2006  the phenomenon  of  internet blogs and interactive websites and chatboards had absolutely exploded.

Not only was it a whole new era of instant feedback to news outlets, but any person, with only even a rudimentary understanding of the use of computers, could instantly become their own regional or worldwide  publisher or take part in any number of exciting discussion and interest groups.  We’ve never turned back. Indeed social networking plus the advent of smart phones, tablets and other highly portable computer-like devices have totally revised the way many of us  communicate, socialize, fund raise and do business all around the world.  For myself, setting up interest streams on Facebook have helped my business,  sharpened my language learning skills (I speak English, French, Spanish, German and some Hebrew and Yiddish) plus generated a 24 hour stream of world art treasures, paintings and photography; all highly inspirational to me in my work as an advertising executive and commercial artist.

But  this new  communication miracle  also served darker interests. Seized upon by haters of every stripe. But Canada, in those lofty days, had a reasonable remedy for  online published hatred. Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.  And nobody wielded this piece of legislation  against more baddies and to greater effect than  Richard Warman.

By 2006, and under the guidance of B’nai Brith I had already used this section successfully in two different projects. Not something that most of you would have likely heard about, because neither of those cases ever went to a hearing.  The first concerned Vancouver and Victoria Indymedia. They were absolutely awash with vitriol: traditional antisemitism plus very explicit hatred against the continued existence of Israel.

Posting refutational material in response was spotty  at best. The Indy editors adamantly were loathe to clean up their discussion boards and it was unruly chaos.  By dint of close observation, I eventually discovered  who the heretofore carefully anonymous  principle editor was; and confirmed a residence address and enough relevant contact information to file a case. The  Commission accepted my complaint, and the fellow was eventually served a set of papers, receiving a packet in the mail. Rather than dispute, negotiate or attend a hearing, the editor  chose instead to make himself very scarce.  As in off of the grid. Virtually untraceable, in fact.

But before doing so,  he obliged us by erasing and disabling the then discussion board, ending the problem at hand.

Also in 2006, a local Victoria blog called www.pej.org (Peace, Earth & Justice) came to my attention in all of the bad far-left publicity that followed in the wake of Israel’s war with Hezbollah in Lebanon that year. PEJ.org became a cruel cesspit of not just criticism, but existential hatred.  Here are  a couple of stories  about it still  accessible online:



To move this story along  I’ll simply say that when finally served with  the complaint, the owner of the site promptly apologized and removed the specifically offending items, ending the problem.

No arrest. No release conditions. No court appearances. No legal fees.

PEJ.org still carries on today. I don’t monitor it anymore. But even if they do put out the occasional article that speaks unkindly of Israel, it’s not rampantly hateful like it was back in the day.

So finally, all of this has really been just a preamble to my initiating  contact with Mr. Topham. Arthur  was, if I recall correctly, for a time, actively associated with  PEJ, and I picked up on something nasty of his that was re-posted there and linked back to his radicalpress.com.  It was then (as it stands today) a virtual toilet of Jew hatred.   In 2007  I pseudonymously emailed the fellow, pointing out one ugly article (the link is still live, but perhaps not for very much longer) and asked him politely, but firmly, if he would kindly remove this article as it was both untrue and  highly offensive to Jews. I also warned that a federal level human rights action might be commenced against him if he didn’t.

I excerpt just a bit of Elie Wiesel’s Holocaust Tale and link it here:

“…Jewish supremacists are poisoning, subverting, perverting, and murdering people of all races. The world is enslaved by their control and their ideologies, with the aid of treasonous gentiles….”

Topham refused to accommodate my request.

So I went back to work and prepared a complaint. He was served and the dispute trundled along at a more or less glacial pace until it finally stalled in 2010; awaiting the outcome of a constitutional challenge to  one of Richard Warman’s  Section 13’s. By then it had become very fashionable for everybody and their cousin in media  all over Canada to roundly condemn this human rights mechanism, and I suppose there were enough exploitable weaknesses with the process as it then was to bring down the entire piece of legislation.

Those were some bad old days.

Canada’s Parliament de-certified this section of the Human Rights Act, and that ended 2 separate complaints that both I and Richard Warman had filed against Topham. Did I forget to mention that Richard Section 13’d Topham simultaneously as well?

Since then, former Canadian Justice Minister Irwin Cotler has forwarded a bill to Parliament, with some very carefully considered amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act. It would be nice to have something like it on the books again, but I don’t suppose it will see the light of day until well after our new government has fully legalized marijuana, and kept a few other election promises first.

So this brings us to 2011, and emboldened, I suppose, by the scuttling of Section 13, Topham appeared to double down on his rants and turned up the heat with more and more classics of hate literature, plus intense vilification of both Richard and myself;  and posted his piece de resistance, the  Israel Must Perish screed,  concocted from an obscure piece of  Allied WW2  propaganda that none of us had ever heard of before.

No doubt, he thought himself very clever to substitute the words Jew for German and Israel for Germany and so on to make up this egregious piece of work.

“…It is assumed that the reader will already be fully cognizant of the Zionist agenda for global governance that is a given in today’s political reality, especially within the alternative media and on the Internet where Zionist “hate” laws are still not fully in place to restrict the natural flow of ideas and opinions that proceed from historical research and experience….”

“…There remains now but to determine the best way, the most practical and expeditious manner in which the ultimate penalty must be levied upon the Israeli nation. Quite naturally, massacre and wholesale execution must be ruled out. In addition to being impractical when applied to a population of some five million, such methods are inconsistent with the moral obligations and ethical practices of civilization. There remains then but one mode of ridding the world forces of Zionism — and that is to stem the source from which issue those war-lusted souls, by preventing the people of Israel from ever again reproducing their kind. This modern method, known to science as Eugenic Sterilization, is at once practical, humane and thorough. Sterilization has become a byword of science, as the best means of ridding the human race of its misfits: the degenerate, the insane, the hereditary criminal.

Sterilization is not to be confused with castration. It is a safe and simple operation, quite harmless and painless, neither mutilating nor unsexing the patient. Its effects are most often less distressing than vaccination and not more serious than a tooth extraction. Too, the operation is extremely rapid requiring no more than ten minutes to complete. The patient may resume his work immediately afterwards. Even in the case of the female the operation, though taking longer to perform, is as safe and simple. Performed thousands of times, no records indicate cases of complication or death. When one realizes that such health measures as vaccination and serum treatments are considered as direct benefits to the community, certainly sterilization of the Jewish people cannot but be considered a great health measure promoted by humanity to immunize itself forever against the virus of Zionism.

…Concerning the males subject to sterilization the army groups, as organized units, would be the easiest and quickest to deal with. Taking 2,000 surgeons as an arbitrary number and on the assumption that each will perform a minimum of 25 operations daily, it would take no more than one month, at the maximum, to complete their sterilization. Naturally the more doctors available, and many more than the 2,000 we mention would be available considering all the nations to be drawn upon, the less time would be required. The balance of the male civilian population of Israel could be treated within three months. Inasmuch as sterilization of women needs somewhat more time, it may be computed that the entire female population of Israel could be sterilized within a period of a year or less. Complete sterilization of both sexes, and not only one, is to be considered necessary in view of the present Jewish doctrine that so much as one drop of true Jewish blood constitutes a Jew….”

And so my friends, especially those of you in media, I must ask you to take particular notice of even just these few paragraphs above, sampled  from the many thousands of pages and years and years of similar invective… volumes of material that all point in the same direction.

This has not been  a complaint about opinions with which I or B’nai Brith or Richard Warman or the Jewish Community of Canada simply disagree.  It’s incitement to genocide. Nothing less.  

Free Speech Takes A Thumping As Thought Control Forces Argue McCorkill Will Is “Against Public Policy”

Free Speech Takes A Thumping As Thought Control Forces Argue McCorkill Will Is “Against Public Policy”

ST.JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK. January 27, 2014. “Where is the McCorkill case being heard?” I asked the court officer just before 9:30 this morning here in St. John.

“Courtroom 13,” he answered.

“Is this our lucky day?” I wondered.

The atmosphere inside Courtroom 13 was more frigid for freedom of thought than the bitter Maritime winter outside the courtroom. This morning lawyers argued that the will of the late Professor Robert McCorkill giving a bequest to the White Nationalist U.S.-based National Alliance be set aside. It was like an Anti-racist Action meeting with slogans of “neo-Nazi” “White supremacist” and “racist” snapping through the air in the Court of Queen’ Bench. There was a lot of “hate” in the air or, at least, how much certain people hate “hate.”

Moncton lawyer Marc-Antoine Chiasson led off the complainant’s case before Judge William T. Grant. He represents the long-estranged sister of the late Robert McCorkill who brought this current action to nullify the bequest. She turned up or was found after being silent during the nine years since her brother’s death, after the militantly anti-free speech U.S.-based Southern Poverty Law Centre (SPLC) found about about the bequest soon after the will was probated in May, 2013. The exceedingly well-funded SPLC, an arch enemy of the National Alliance, went on the warpath to stop the bequest. The only problem for them was that they have no legal standing in Canada. Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman was soon being quoted in the press commenting that the bequest should be nullified because I was contrary to public policy. Isabelle McCorkell [yes, different spelling] emerged and, although she claims to live on $1,000 a month hired a pricey Moncton law firm to obtain an ex-parte injunction freezing the assets of the will and then a further application to nullify the bequest. Piling in to support her were the Attorney General of New Brunswick , the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith and the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

” This is an unusual case,” Mr. Chiasson noted. And then the smears and name-calling began: “The Court must decide whether it is acceptable or appropriate to leave a bequest to a White supremacist, neo-Nazi organization that wants to rid North America of Jews.”

“We should not be able to interfere with a will on a whim because we don’t like the beneficiary,” he added. [Then, why are we here? I wondered.]

However, he added, “there is a certain line that cannot be crossed, but the line has been crossed with the bequest to the National Alliance and we ask this Court to intervene.”

“The Court should intervene in very few cases,” he admitted. However, an exception should be made for “hate propaganda” and “hate groups.” He quote Mr.Justice Cory in the appeal to the Federal Court of Appeals in the Don Andrews “hate law case” back in the 1970s. The judge had said that “hate meant the instilling of detestation in others and does incalculable damage to the Canadian community.”

“Sec. 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code prohibit ‘hate propaganda’ and the promtion of genocide,” he added.

The three lawyers arguing for the application repeatedly demanded suppression of people and views their clients didn’t like. “Any group that promotes views contrary to the human rights codes is unacceptable,” Mr. Chiasson announced. “The International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination condemn all groups that promote the superiority of a race and the participation in or financing of such groups,” he added. [Did Canada or its Parliament knowingly sign on to such a mental straight jacket.]

“Multiculturalism and equality are the linchpins of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” he said. The Charter, it might be noted, for all its talk of “equality” grants special privileges to favoured minorities.

Paul Fromm being interviewed by Neville Crabbe of CBC News

So, he argued, “we have adopted the view that, in Canada, the propaganda of the National Alliance, the existence of the National Alliance and the financing of the National Alliance is contrary to public policy.” Mr. Chiasson professed himself outraged that the National Alliance believes in “the preservation of the White Race and racial separation.” Reading from the National Alliance’s 2005 Membership Handbook, he quoted the NA’s programme: “We must have White work spaces, White farms, White schools. … We want an environment where our own nature can express itself. We must root out Semitic and non-Aryan influences.”

Mr. Chiason equated White self-preservation with White Supremacy.

“We just can’t stop ideas at the border due to the power of the Internet,” he complained.

Apparently, dissenting in certain historical debates is against the law, at least in Mr. Chiasson’s submissions: “The National Alliance says ‘the holocaust is a myth’. This is hate speech and contrary to public policy.” He expressed further shock at a comment by the National Alliance: “We have a debt of gratitude to Adolf Hitler who was the greatest man of our era.” [One wonders whether we’d be in Court with a two volume record o fwell over 600 pages of submissions and exhibits if the National Alliance had hailed Joseph Stalin or Mao Tse Tung or even Pol Pot as the greatest man of our era.]

No evidence had been adduced of homicidal inclinations on the part of the NA, but, Mr. Chiasson concluded: “The sole purpose of the NA is promoting hate and killing non-Whites, its sole objective is to create White living space, and, thus, it offends public policy. The gift is illegal and against public policy and should be voided. Mr. McCorkill should be declared intestate and, therefore, my client and her brother would be the beneficiaries of the estate.”

Next up was Richard Williams of Fredericton, representing the Attorney General of New Brunswick. “|Our only interest in this matter is our belief that the bequest is illegal and contrary to public policy,” he said. A strong voice for repression, he declared: “The theme of the Charter and human rights codes is that racism will not be allowed in this country.” He professed himself upset at the notion of “White living space”, although he made no mention of native land claims or special lands for Indians or Eskimos.

He added “there is no redeeming merit” in the National Alliance. Attempting to answer an argument in CAFE’s brief that nullifying the McCorkill will could launch a flood of similar litigation, he concluded: “I never expect to have a case like this again in my career.”

The final presentation of the morning came on behalf of another intervener, the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith. Representing B’nai Brith, Catherine Fawcett insisted: “The National Alliance has a presence in Canada and is well known to the League.” Whether the NA has actually committed acts of violence “doesn’t matter. They put out ideas that incite hate. Their membership is restricted to White people who support the objectives of the NA. [One wonders whether certain Jewish or Catholic groups might not similarly be restricted to adherents of their faith who support the group’s objectives.]

“What you read in their Handbook,” she charged, “is we will recruit and build infrastructure for final victory. But you must read between the lines. A further danger of the National Alliance is a video game they produced called Ethnic Cleansing,” she added. She didn’t explain what it was about.

“In the NA Handbook, they say: “The holocaust story in engineered by Jews or is full of exaggerations.’ This is contrary to Canadian values,” she insisted.

Elsewhere, the NA says that “AIDS has taken off undesireables among Whites — homosexuals, intravenous drug users, and those who have sex with non-Whites. That, M’lord, is hate.”

In a country that does not have a Second Amendment to protect the right to keep and bear arms, Miss Fawcett was very critical of the NA Handbook urging members to have weapons for the defence of their family or to join the state militia, if necessary. The Handbook recommended a riot gun, a military semi-automatic rifle, a handgun and at least 500 rounds of ammunition.

She took great exception to the NA saying: “The Aryan Race has the right to ensure its own survival and it must have a White living space including Europe, North America and the southern tip of Africa.”

NA Chairman Erich Gleibe in an affidavit “says the National Alliance has no programmes in Canada, but the effect of the National Alliance message is to corrupt people and turn a small receptive minority against multiculturalism. We can stop printed material at the border and we have ‘anti-hate’ legislation but the Internet can reach so many.”

Concluding, she said: “This Court has the power to strike down the testamentary gift to the National Alliance and stop it spreading its message of hate.”

The hearing continues tomorrow. — Paul Fromm

B’nai Brith’s Annual “Audit” of Anti-Semitic Incidents is Out: If This Was a Real “Audit”, You’d Fire the Auditor’s Ass

ISRAEL FIRSTB’nai Brith’s Annual “Audit” of Anti-Semitic Incidents is Out: If This Was a Real “Audit”, You’d Fire the Auditor’s Ass

For more than 30 years the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith has published what it calls its annual “audit” of anti-Semitic incidents in Canada. Always it is the same dreary breathless  hysteria — things are getting worse. and worse. You’d think the blackshirts were back in town, a synagogue being burned in every city and a pogrom going on just right around the corner. Is any of that happening? No! Canada has the most Israel First government ever. Our Prime Minister has insisted that: “Israel’s values are our values. .. An attack an Israel is an attack on Canada.” [We don’t even say that about our friend and neighbour the United States.]

 The executive summary of the report gives the highlights: ” For over 30 years, the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada’s annual Audit of Antisemitic Incidents has documented harassment, vandalism and violence targeting both individual Jews, and the Jewish community as a whole. This provides a barometer of the levels of racism in this country in general.


  • In 2012, 1,345 antisemitic incidents were reported to the League, an increase of 3.7% over the 1,297 cases documented in 2011. Over     the past decade, incidents have more than doubled.




* The iincease in Canada in 2012 is still far below the estimated 30% global rise in antisemitic incidents. There was also a decrease in vandalism against Jewish community sites.




  • ·       The 1,345 incidents include 1,013 cases of harassment (75.8% of the total), 319 of vandalism (23.2%), and 13 of violence (1.0%). 





    • Vandalism decreased on average     across Canada by 11.9%, with 319 cases in 2012 compared to 362 in 2011. Violence     decreased for the third year running, with 13 cases reported in 2012,     a significant drop from 24 cases in 2010 and 19 in 2011. Harassment     increased by 7.4% from 916 in 2011 to 1,013 in 2012, including 84     threats of violence.



There were 521 web-based incidents; about half used social media to harass and threaten others. Web postings and emails included anti-Jewish propaganda from extremist groups advocating violence, hate-filled lyrics and imagery, and Holocaust Denial.”




Notice that almost half — 521 of 1,345 “incidents” were on the Internet: “Web postings and emails included anti-Jewish propaganda from extremist groups advocating violence, hate-filled lyrics and imagery, and Holocaust Denial.” Notice, as well, that questioning or challenging the Hollywood version of WW II — “holocaust denial”  — constitutes an “incident.” Notice further that “hate-filled lyrics and imagery” (pictures?) also constitute “incidents.” Interesting, that hostile actions, as opposed to the expression of opinions have decreased.




The “incidents”, one might conclude are crimes, but almost all are not. There were just  “13 cases of violence reported in 2012.” There is no information as to whether even these really occurred or whether anyone was charged or found criminally guilty. It is all pretty thin stuff. Indeed, only one charge is mentioned, although not specifically – the Sec. 319 charge against Arthur Topham and radicalpress.com




Here’s the incredibly broad definition from the Audit’s Appendix  of “harassment” which constitute 1013 or 75% of the “incidents”:


 “Harassment refers to written or verbal actions that do not include the use of physical force. … It includes but is not limited to:


* verbal slurs, statements of hate and bias, or harassment.” [Now, that’s defining a term by repeating it!]


* stereotyping of Jews, like airing on radio talk shows of ‘characteristics of Jews.’ [Yet, a stereotype’ is merely a generalization based on truth and any reasonable person knows most but not ALL members of a group share these characteristics.]


* systemic discrimination in the workplace, schools or campuses. [“Systemic discrimination” refers to any uncongenial events where nothing can be proven against an individual,  apparently, like universities holding an Anti-Israeli Apartheid Week.]


* hate propaganda and hate mail, via the Internet, telephone or printed material [Again, “hate propaganda” seems to be merely criticism of Jews or Israel, or views the person reporting them doesn’t like.]






 Jewish groups have been among the most vocal lobbying for open door immigration, as Kevin Macdonald noted in his book The Culture of Critique. They have been strong proponents of “diversity.” Thus, it is somewhat ironic that one of the growing sources of “anti-Semitism” — usually limited to words – is Moslems, one of the many “diverse” groups brought in by the changes in Canada’s immigration policies in 1965: ” When reviewing the types of messaging we see replicated in many of the incidents under review in this Audit, it seems that certain ethnic/religious groups in this country, even those that came generations ago, may have brought the anti-Jewish hatreds of their native lands with them to Canada. Moreover, there are concerns that some Canadians might continue to come into contact with these prejudices locally, even once established in this country, not just through ongoing connections with anti-semitic online sites operating from abroad, but by local influences. In this context, two particular incidents should be highlighted. In British Colombia, a community-based Muslim paper printed conspiracy theories blaming Jews for a range of alleged crimes and refused to withdraw the article even after complaints. In Toronto, anti-Jewish propaganda was found in the curriculum material of a private Muslim school, which was removed but only after complaints were lodged.
Incidents such as these might partly explain the finding in this Audit of an unprecedented increase in incidents by perpetrators self-identifying as Muslims supportive of Islamist anti-Jewish sentiments – up from 16 in 2011 to 87 in 2012. … While perpetrators from a number of different ethnic/religious backgrounds were involved in these incidents, the one finding that stood out alarmingly was the number of incidents by those identifying them-selves as Muslims, which jumped from 16 in 2011 to 87 in 2012. This suggests a most disturbing trend in which anti-Jewish themes appear to be increasingly infiltrating Canadian civil society via quasi-religious or cultural discourse as well politically-based rhetoric. No other ethnic or religious group of perpetrators came anywhere near this number in 2012. “




Even many Jews are skeptical of the ever increasing number of “incidents” B’nai Brith report. Bernie Farber, then a leading light with the rival Canadian Jewish Congress, noted that there could be a 100 per cent increase in “hate literature” if a pamphleteer who last year distributed 1,000 pamphlets got a few more reams of paper and ran off 2,000 copies.



Here’s a sample of one month’s worth of representative incidents chosen by the Audit:


 APRIL Vancouver, BC – A pastor makes anti-semitic comments during his sermon
Montreal, QC – A prolific blogger tells the media that Chassidic Jews “are religious fanatics trying to create their own laws through intimidation”.
Toronto, ON – In Union Station, the busiest bus terminal in Toronto, walls are spray painted with graffiti saying “Jews are like cancer”. V
al Morin, QC – 15 Jewish-owned cottages are vandalized and defaced with swastikas and slogans such as “F–k Juif.”


 What does it add up to? Some petty vandalism. And these “incidents” are chosen as the worst for the month!

The Audit seems to find marches or parades promoting “White Pride Worldwide” to be anti-Semitic incidents: “There were 151 incidents in 2012 related to white supremacist activity, similar to the 145 cases reported in 2011. Marches were reported in Vancouver (BC), as well as Edmonton and Calgary (AB), and London (ON), areas where far-right activity has been recorded in past years. Police were active in countering racist activity on the streets of British Columbia and Alberta, which is likely the reason for decreased attendance at such public events.” The last statement is chilling. What does it mean that police “countered? Did that mean harass the organizers? And why should police “counter” political activity. Isn’t it their role to be politically neutral and keep the peace. Also, not to quibble, but what is slanderously called “White supremacist” often means statements about race — White racial pride — and nothing overtly about Jews? One wonders why these 152 “incidents” are even included in the Audit of anti-Semitic incidents.


 So, where is all this hyperventilating leading? As usual, B’nai Brith portrays Jews as a “vulnerable minority.” The 2001 census, instead, found they are Canada’s wealthiest ethnic or religious group. They are heavily represented — out of all proportion to their percentage of Canada’s population [ according to the 2011 census, Jews are 315,120 of a population of 33,476,688 or .94% ] in the mass media and they certainly have the ear of the Harper government.
The Audit wants the government “to make Holocaust denial a specific hate crime under the Criminal Code.” Thus Canadians would have to buy into self-serving tribal history or face prison. Just what is “holocaust denial” — questioning the numbers killed? questioning the preposterous proposition that this was “the greatest crime in human history” — the alleged 6-million apparently being worse than the 8-10-million Ukrainians deliberately starved to death by Stalin in the holodomor, 1932-1933, The second anti-free speech demand is nearly as sweeping and Stalinist: “Ban membership in hate groups” Who gets to say what a “hate group” is? And, by the way, mightn’t a group labouring so mightily to take away freedom of speech be seen as somewhat hateful?
 This poster, captioned “Jews First, Canadians Second” presumably from the Internet was one of the anti-Semitic “incidents” included in B’nai Brith’s annual Audit.