by Lawrence Blanchard, ND, M.Div. Did you see the two stories that appeared recently about a law student and law professor who challenged the tolerance and diversity program in America? The challenge exposed the glaring hypocritical exception of the high and mighty advocates pushing tolerance and diversity down our collective throats. “Truth be damned” should be their motto. The first story was about a law student at the Oklahoma City University of Law who “left some flyers”1 around the school with the phrase, “It’s Okay to Be White.”
The law school dean went ballistic, promising an “intentional and relentless” promotion of diversity to counter such a notion. Police were called to investigate to see if “the flyers” and this “person’s actions amounted to a hate crime. They wanted to make sure this student was “not a threat to other students.”
“The OCU police department reportedly partnered with the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force to locate and interrogate the student activist.” 1
EDMONTON: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (jccf.ca) is
pleased with the January 6, 2020 decision of the Alberta Court of
Appeal, which rejects the University of Alberta’s imposition of a
$17,500 security fee on UAlberta Pro-Life. Demanded by the University in
2016, this security fee had prevented the small student club from
hosting educational displays on campus. Analysis of the decision is
ongoing.
The case arose in March of 2015, when the University of Alberta condoned
the behaviour of a mob that physically obstructed a peaceful,
stationary pro-life display on campus, which had been authorized and
approved by the University. The mob used sheets, towels, banners, and
mega-phones, making it impossible for passers-by to view the signs. The
mob effectively silenced intellectual discussion and inquiry, in
violation of the Code of Student Behaviour. Prior to this physical
obstruction and disruption of a university-approved campus event, the
University’s president had stated publicly that the pro-life group was
entitled to express its opinions on campus. Then-president Indira
Samarasekera stated the University must facilitate and protect the
peaceful expression of all views, regardless of popularity.
Dr. Samarasekera’s statement was not taken seriously by campus
security or by the students who violated the Code of Student Behaviour.
The University’s campus security repeatedly told members of the
obstructing mob that they were violating the Code of Student Behaviour,
which expressly prohibits interrupting and obstructing
university-related activities and events. Yet campus security took no
action to stop the obstruction, or to discipline the students who
identified themselves publicly and boasted on social media about their
success in silencing a message they disagreed with.
In 2016, UAlberta Pro-Life applied again for a two-day campus event
with a stationary display. The University then demanded a $17,500
security fee as a condition for going ahead with this campus event.
In an email, the
University demanded that pro-life students pay for the wages of
security guards and police, and costs of barricading the venue, and pay
for the potential misconduct of people violating the University’s Code
of Student Behaviour by obstructing and disrupting the display. Rather
than render an invoice to the self-identified and self-confessed
rule-breakers, the University instead told the small pro-life club that
it could no longer set up a display on campus unless it first paid
$17,500 in security fees. Unable to pay $17,500, UAlberta Pro-Life was
forced to cancel the event that was planned for February 2016.
“In issuing this demand, the University of Alberta ignored the fact
that any threat to safety and security that may have existed on campus
came uniquely from those who physically obstructed and loudly
interrupted a university-approved event,” stated lawyer John Carpay,
president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which
represents the students in their court action.
In its court application, filed in April of 2016, UAlberta Pro-Life
sought a declaration that the University’s imposition of the $17,500
security fee on the club was illegal and unjustifiably violated the
fundamental Canadian value of freedom of expression, protected by
section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court
application asked for an order prohibiting the University from imposing
such financial burdens on law-abiding students in future.
The court application also sought a ruling that the University made
an unreasonable and therefore illegal decision in March of 2015 to
condone the conduct of students who disrupted and blockaded the
University-authorized UAlberta Pro-Life campus event, in violation of
the Code of Student Behaviour. Although the University had
advance notice that a mob was being organized to obstruct the display,
and although Dr. Samarasekera had warned that any misbehaviour would be
investigated and prosecuted, the University of Alberta Protective
Services (UAPS) did nothing to stop the blockading and physical
obstruction. UAPS also did not photograph or seek to identify any
blockading student, even though the Code clearly prohibits students from
disrupting or obstructing University-related functions.
Before taking court action, UAlberta Pro-Life first filed a formal
complaint in March 2015 with UAPS against the disruptive students who
had violated the Code of Student Behaviour. It took UAPS over eight
months to release a decision. On November 30, 2015 UAPS confirmed that
the University would not charge or prosecute students who had disrupted,
blocked and obstructed the March 2015 display on campus. This decision
came in spite of UAPS possessing ample photographic and video evidence
as to which students had violated the Code of Student Behaviour, in
addition to social media posts in which these blockading students
publicly boasted about their own behaviour.
The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench ruled in favour of the University
in October 2017. The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
(BCCLA) intervened before the Alberta Court of Appeal, in support of
freedom of expression. The students appealed, and now have a decision
from the Alberta Court of Appeal.
An economics instructor at the University of British Columbia thinks it’s “casual racism” for fraternity members to be allowed to lay wreaths at the school’s Remembrance Day ceremony.
“Economics instructor Maria Adshade took to Twitter to ask UBC president Santa Ono why fraternity members were allowed to lay wreaths at the school’s Remembrance Day ceremony.”
At 11:22 am, during the University’s Remembrance Day ceremonies, she tweeted at the President “wondering why frat boys are laying wreaths at the Remembrance (sic) Day Ceremony at UBC. Surely there are other more representative groups on campus to play this role?”
Adshade followed up her thoughtless and poorly timed tirade with accusations of bigotry, tweeting:
“Regardless of how any of you feel about me, you should not be supporting this casual racism.”
Racism? For allowing young men to honour the young men who died for their freedom?
CTV News reached out to her for comment and Adshade doubled down, saying:
“I stand by what I said. UBC prides itself on being an inclusive and diverse campus. That was not reflected today by the student representation at the ceremony today.”
Adshade, apparently not one to quit when she is behind, then made herself the victim of mean sexist frat boys and not her own bigoted public remarks, tweeting:
“The UBC Fraternity members who are commenting here are entirely free to voice their opinions. But know that your members who are emailing me threatening me with sexual violence are doing nothing to help your cause.”
However, she never produced any of these emailed “threats.”
UBC’s own website affirms the high cost their student body paid for freedom during World War 2, noting that 1,600 UBC trainees enlisted to serve in the war and 10% of those would not make it back home alive. UBC also became a school of choice for returning veterans.
Professor Woke-Scold doesn’t know the history of her own university.
Lieutenant Colonel Dr. John McCrae wrote his poem In Flanders Field during World War 1, the very same war that claimed his life. If he were alive today, Adshade would want him banned from laying a wreath too.
Jim and Diane Present
Alison Chabloz’
Second Arrest and Update, Jan 15, 2020
(Text, Not a Video)
Dear All,
Apologies for the lack of recent updates. First of all, some positive
news. Last Friday, January 10th (full moon), I was again in the dock for
my appeal against the National Probation Service (NPS), this time at
Derby Crown Court. To recap, the NPS had brought a retroactive breach
trial against me for publishing on my personal website during the
year-long Prohibited Activity Order which required me not to post or
participate on “social media outlets”. Once again, there were slight
procedural errors: the Crown’s barrister, Mr. Christopher Jeyes, had not
received the appropriate skeleton argument in good time, apparently
preventing the Crown and NPS from providing disclosure on how the
decision to breach me had been reached. The main issue here is Campaign
Against Antisemitism (CAA) applying political pressure and meddling in
my case – a fact they have freely admitted on several occasions. Sitting
with two magistrates, HHJ Egbuna told the court that it would be wrong
to listen to the evidence and submissions without first establishing
whether or not the decision to breach me constituted abuse of process. I
agreed to an adjournment. A two-day re-trial has been scheduled for
June 26th and 27th.
The most interesting revelation was the admission by the opposition that
the decision to breach me had not been taken by my probation officer’s
superior, but by someone “from the level above”. And now for the
not-so-good news. As I walked out of court, I was arrested under Section
127 of the 2003 Communications Act by one of four plainclothes
policemen – two of whom had been sitting in court. I had half-expected
it, having ignored another request for an interview under caution.
Still, I was annoyed. Ex-Britain First Intel Officer, half-Jewish Paul
Besser, was there to represent Joe Glasman’s Maccabees, Third Division.
As we reached the station, the officer who was driving (who I later
discovered was local and just helping out with a colleague) radioed the
desk. He announced that they were bringing in a woman “under the Public
Order Act”. Police lie to each other, as well as to the general public: a
nest of vipers. Of course, in hindsight, if I had resisted and these
officers had been caught on film using violence against me to drag me
into an unmarked car… I was interviewed about an Internet podcast, the
link to which had been shared on my GAB account. Replying mostly no
comment to their questions, it lasted an hour and a half and was utterly
Orwellian. No surprises for guessing the name of the “victim” – Stephen
Silverman, CAA Director of Investigations and Enforcement. Most
questions came directly from Silverman’s own witness statement. Others
were no doubt the result of police (combined with the intelligence
services?) seeking information, as well as a deliberate attempt to have
me incriminate myself. Apparently, because “most people” believe in the
gas chamber narrative, anyone who doesn’t believe is not “the norm”. I
couldn’t help laughing at the irony of being interrogated by police
detectives who unquestioningly believe every aspect of the mainstream
“Holocaust” narrative – and more: there were, according to DC E. of
Lincolnshire Police, homicidal gas chambers at Belsen. The entire
two-hour-long Internet podcast had been transcribed, and the offending
passages highlighted in yellow. At one point, when my solicitor was
absent from the room and the recording was halted with the tape still
running, I asked the detectives if they had any actual crime to
investigate, for example, child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, still
free to travel the world at leisure. They told me they were unable to
answer… I wondered why both of these men were “good cops” and where
the “bad cop” might be. I soon found out. When the interview was over
and I was taken back to the lobby, I noticed sitting behind the desk
sergeant a dark-skinned, uniformed man with large brown eyes, long hair
and a black bandanna. His expression was not friendly. I was led back to
the custody cell and, twenty minutes or so later, this same man
unlocked my door. Standing behind him were both interviewing officers.
He was introduced as Detective Sergeant B… This man then proceeded to
verbally abuse me, stating he didn’t like my attitude and if he was
going to let me out of “his station”, then I would be forced to live and
sleep at a declared address. By the time they released me, it was
already too late to return home. I noted drily that police were
releasing me – a single woman – without any means of transport to the
address I was supposed to sleep at. That wasn’t all. My other police
bail condition is “not to post on line anything” – an unwarranted
restriction of my right to free speech and probably unlawful. The Crown
will now have to make a decision whether or not to charge me for
“grossly offending” a man who has a restraining order against me but who
nevertheless sees fit to stalk my every move in the hope of seeing me
once again clamped in irons for my views. Despite the presence of one
journalist in court – who refused to disclose who she works for (my
educated guess would be Isabella Nikolic For Mailonline) – and Besser’s
silly tweets, there has been no media coverage whatsoever. Likewise,
silence from CAA. Other usual stasi suspects, permanently ensconced in
the Twitter echo chamber, are unable to hide their glee that “a vile
anti-Semitic Holocaust denier” is once again being punished for
peacefully expressing her own opinions. CAA, a registered “charity”,
faces further embarrassment following Friday’s publication of Joe
Glasman’s “Christmukah” video by The Electronic Intifada, (see also
December, in my recent Review of 2019). Glasman’s copyright claims were a
case of closing the stable doors after the horse had bolted.
Thank you to all who sent supportive messages and especially to my
barrister, Adrian Davies, my solicitor, Kevin Lowry-Mullins, the
solicitor who represented me on Friday, Mr Raja, and to all four loyal
friends who made the effort to be beside me in court. Thanks also to
Sargon of Akkad who finally, after all this time, has spoken out about
my case and called for S. 127 to be repealed. Sargon is (wilfully?)
ignorant about the controversy surrounding the official narrative, but
he is nevertheless correct in stating that S. 127 is being abused in
order to criminalise opinions. My case is exposing the extent to which
this bad law is being used by the System to stifle peaceful protest,
historical debate and, most sinister of all, silence a musician for her
satirical songs and for her beliefs. Alison Chabloz. January 13th, 2020.
Activist acquitted because Quebec City prosecutors were incapable of holding trial in English
Basem Boshra
Supervising Producer, CTV News Montreal
@BasemBoshraContact
Published Wednesday, January 15, 2020 2:55PM EST
Last Updated Wednesday, January 15, 2020 5:59PM EST
Activist
Jaggi Singh is arrested during an anti-racism demonstration, in Quebec
City on Sunday, August 20, 2017. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jacques Boissinot
SHARE
301
MONTREAL —
Activist Jaggi Singh, who has been facing charges stemming from his
arrest at an anti-fascist protest held in 2017, walked out of Quebec
City court a free man on Wednesday after prosecutors announced they were
incapable of proceeding with Singh’s trial in English.
According to Le Journal du Quebec,
Steve Marquis, the chief Crown prosecutor for Quebec City, told Judge
Pierre Bordeleau that neither he nor any of his available colleagues
were capable of presenting the prosecution’s arguments in English.
(Singh, who is fluently bilingual, had requested a trial in English.)
Marquis – who told the judge that the original prosecutor in the case,
who could proceed in English, was on maternity leave – asked for a delay
in the proceedings, which Bordeleau denied. The judge then acquitted
Singh on the two charges, obstruction of justice and impersonation, that
he was facing.
Singh, 49, a veteran activist, was arrested Aug. 20, 2017, at an
anti-fascist counter-protest to an alt-right gathering. When arrested,
Singh told police his name was Michel Goulet (the name of an old Quebec
Nordiques player) and said he resided in La Colisee (the Nordiques’ old
arena).
Singh told Le Journal du Quebec on his way out of court that he felt
the prosecution sabotaged its own case rather than lose the trial, which
had been scheduled to run today through Friday.
A Serial Pedophile Got 2 Years Less A Day; Yet, a Judge Wanted to Give a Satirist 36 Months for “Hate” — Telling Jokes About Women & Jews
In 1997, pedophile Gordon Stuckless pleaded guilty to 27 counts of molesting boys some as young as 10. He worked as an equipment manager at Toronto’s Maple Leaf Gardens. He got two years less a day. Last year, a judge wanted to sentence satirical writer Dr. James Sears to 36 months for National Lampoon style jokes about women and Jews. In cultural Marxist Canada, it’s worse to screw politically correct ideas than to bugger little boys.
Jonathan Yaniv PUNCHED ME in the head for reporting on his court case — WATCH IT HERE! https://rebeldonations.com/jessica-jonathan-yaniv-trial-reports/
Jonathan Yaniv PUNCHED ME in the head for reporting
on his court case — WATCH IT HERE!
Being punched by Jessica Yaniv is a weird kind of mark of credibility.
Jonathan “Jessica” Yaniv punched me in the head for reporting on his court appearance over two counts of possessing a prohibited weapon! Yaniv waited inside the courthouse until the moment it closed — and as he left, I gently approached him to ask him about it. But instead of answering my questions, Yaniv charged into a vicious, testosterone-fuelled rage — check out my exclusive footage atYanivTrial.com: Do you agree that this man is a danger to society? Not only has he tried to extort several aestheticians after they refused to wax his testicles, but he has also been responsible for a number of violent assaults and has been charged with two counts of possessing a prohibited weapon — and yet, he is still free to roam the streets of British Columbia! (To see all of our exclusive reporting on Yaniv — including our documentary on him — please visitYanivTrial.com.) It takes a lot to expose Yaniv’s abuse of the system — hours of court research, dozens of interactions with lawyers, thousands of dollars in travel expenses, and today, a savage beating. So, if you believe in our efforts to expose this menace with our original, full-contact journalism, please pitch in to help me keep reporting on this story — click here, or visit YanivTrial.com to help us out. Yours truly, Keean Bexte P.S. This isn’t the first beating we’ve taken at the man mitts of Yaniv. My Rebel News colleague David Menzies was struck — several times (!) — on the head with a cane by Yaniv last year. (You can see that assault at YanivTrial.com.) And yet, as I mentioned earlier, he remains at large and free to live without consequences.
Do you think this is fair? If not, can you help us stay on this story? Please click here, or visit YanivTrial.com to pitch in to help us out.
Soon you may have to check with the pushy censors at B’nai Brith before you can buy a board game. The latest victim of this thought control group’s efforts is a fast selling board game which pits liberals against National Socialists in 1933 Germany as they vie for power. It’s a game! Yet, in joyless, politically correct Canada, B’nai Brith has leaned on three Montreal merchants and got them to stop selling it. Why not let gaming customers decide what they’d like to buy? — Paul Fromm
Secret Hitler board game pulled from Montreal stores after complaint from B’nai Brith
The stores began selling the game over the holidays after receiving requests from customers and ‘many copies were sold,’ a manager said
A controversial board game called Secret Hitler was removed from
the shelves of three Montreal stores on Sunday after a complaint from
B’nai Brith Canada.
A member of the Jewish human rights group,
which combats racism and anti-Semitism, contacted the Tour de Jeux
outlet at the Fairview Shopping Centre in Pointe-Claire after reading
posts on Facebook and receiving complaints from members of Montreal’s
Jewish community.
The game was developed in 2017 and is set in Germany in 1933 when Adolf Hitler came to power as chancellor.
Players
are secretly divided into two teams, liberals and fascists. The
fascists sow distrust and try to install their leader. The liberals must
find and stop the Secret Hitler before it’s too late.
“Anything that depicts anything regarding Hitler is a very sensitive issue, especially with growing anti-Semitism throughout Canada, the U.S. and around the world,” said Harvey Levine, B’nai Brith’s regional director in Quebec.
“When
we receive complaints from the community, we have to respond. This is a
sensitive issue with the Jewish population and with families of those
involved in the Holocaust.”
After talking to Levine, the store
manager on the West Island contacted the owner, who decided the game
would no longer be sold at its three Montreal locations.
“(Levine)
expressed his and the community’s shock concerning the fact that the
game exists and that we would carry it,” said the store manager, who
didn’t want his name published. “I’m glad that he spoke to us directly.”
The stores began selling the board game over the holidays after receiving requests from customers, the manager said.
“Between our three stores, many copies were sold,” he said.
The
board game has been distributed worldwide through Amazon and there have
been complaints from other Jewish groups in the U.S. and Australia,
Levine said.
B’nai Brith officials are assessing the situation before deciding whether to issue a formal statement, he added.
Sales
of board games have increased over the past five years. Games such as
Settlers of Catan, which emphasize strategy and co-operation, are
increasingly popular.
A George Mason University professor recently slammed Amrican universities for wasting students’ tuition on “diversity people.”
The
professor was referring to the seemingly endless need colleges claim
for adding countless “diversity and inclusion” staff and offices, which
he says rack up insane costs for universities.
An
economics professor at George Mason University is speaking out about
the “racket” that he says is college, and blaming it on the “diversity
people” who he says have flooded the university system with unnecessary
and perpetually increasing expenses tied to a seemingly endless need for
more and more diversity initiatives and faculty.
In his op-ed for The National Interest,
George Mason University professor Walter E. Williams explains that
institutions of higher education have started budgeting for “diversity
and equity personnel” to accommodate the modern-day college student. The
idea, Williams says, is to protect “vulnerable” groups of students from
“hate speech” and “microaggressions,” noting that they have even gone
as far as creating speech codes and bias-response teams to investigate
complaints. “‘Diversity’ is the highest goal of students and professors who openly detest those with whom they disagree” Tweet This
But
Williams also takes issue with the fact that it doesn’t stop there. As
each of these programs is created, colleges and universities find a
“need” for more programs and faculty and therefore more money to fund
these initiatives.
Diversity programs and staff come at a high price. Williams cites a study by a group called “Minding the Campus,”
which found that Penn State University’s Office of the Vice Provost for
Educational Equity employs a total of 66 individual staff members. “The
University of Michigan currently employs a diversity staff of 93
full-time diversity administrators, officers, directors, vice provosts,
deans, consultants, specialists, investigators, managers, executive
assistants, administrative assistants, analysts, and coordinators.
Amherst College, with a student body of 1,800 students employs 19
diversity people,” writes Williams.
According to Williams, the
salaries of the staff match the scale of these new programs, with top
diversity staff earning six-figure salaries. This is especially true
with schools like the University of Michigan where a quarter of their
diversity officers make more than $100,000 annually.
Williams cites an article by “diversity” skeptic and lawyer Mark Pulliam, a contributing editor at Law and Liberty, in which he discusses “the campus Diversity Swarm.”
The radical left will stop at nothing to intimidate conservative students on college campuses. You can help expose them.Find out more »
Williams claims that “diversity people” have created an entire
subsect of academia, having “developed their own professional
organization, the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher
Education,” with annual conferences during which they develop “standards
for professional practice and a political agenda. He also points to the
fact that they have created their own academic journal, published by
the American Psychological Association.
In
the article, Pulliam describes “Diversity and inclusion” as “the latest
obsession in higher education, and elite schools compete with one
another to see who can field the largest and best-paid team of diversity
bureaucrats (diversocrats).”
“It’s an article of faith that
‘diversity’ originally a euphemism for affirmative action, somehow
enhances the educational environment, but data supporting the mismatch theory—which
holds that affirmative action hurts minority students by placing them
in academic programs for which they are unqualified—refute this claim,”
writes Pulliam.
Williams sees this as a vicious cycle, saying
“‘Diversity’ is the highest goal of students and professors who openly
detest those with whom they disagree. These people support the very
antithesis of higher education with their withering attacks on free
speech.”
Follow the author of this article on Twiter:@_EverettKatie
In a show of incompetence, the CBC’s 5th Estate has
accidentally released the identity of a longtime Antifa informant. This
is someone who works with, employs, and shares information with the
members and supporters of the violent Antifa movement: Schoolteacher
Kurt Phillips.
The
CBC was intending to cooperate with Phillips to conceal his identity,
however when facial images were matched up, none other than Kurt
Phillips, a Catholic School teacher in Drumheller Alberta was exposed as
the mastermind behind ARC Collective.
ARC is a blog that was curated by Phillips until he recently resigned
after his mask was removed. Phillips’ blog has shared the personal
information, addresses, photos of homes, names, and faces of people who
Phillips unilaterally determines are “fascists”.
Rebel News sent Phillips a list of questions with hopes to get his
side of the story, however they were ignored. The school was quick to
stand by Phillips – Principal JoAnne Akerboom insists Phillips is
politically neutral and doesn’t bring his personal activism
to the classroom. Tweets posted by an account bearing his name and
photo appear to contradict the assertion he is neutral.
As for personal activism in to the classroom, that also seems to be untrue, as Phillips’ blog routinely posts defamatory content,
during hours he is supposed to be teaching students. One might wonder
how much taxpayer funded time Phillips is using to research, write,
edit, and publish information that is fed to Antifa, an organization the
President has considered labeling a terrorist group.
