CAFE

Dedicated to Free Speech, Immigration Reform, and Restoring Political Sanity

CAFE

Canadian Roundtable – The Trial of Arthur Topham & The Jewish Lobby in Canada

Canadian Roundtable – The Trial of Arthur Topham & The Jewish Lobby in Canada

 
Frederick Fromm's photo.
Canadian Roundtable – The Trial of Arthur Topham & The Jewish Lobby in Canada
February 10, 2016
 

Canadian born Arthur Topham has a background in Political Science and Education. Since 1999 he has been the Writer, Journalist, Publisher & Editor of RadicalPress.com. Paul Fromm heads the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee and the Canadian Association for Free Expression, Canada’s leading defender of free speech. Gilad Atzmon is a British jazz artist and author who was born in Israel. He is a member of the Blockheads, founded the Orient House Ensemble, and also writes on political matters, social issues, Jewish identity and culture. Brian Ruhe was a monk in Thailand and has taught Buddhism since 1996 in the Vancouver, BC area. He hosts a YouTube channel talk show where he challenges Jewish supremacy and talks about the revisionist history of World War II. Jason Erb has been writing for his blog, Exposing Faux Capitalism, since the start of the global financial collapse of 2008 and has been hosting his own weekly radio show since 2012.

We bring together this roundtable to address the demographic and cultural suicide that is plaguing the West, along with the repressive laws that are compounding Canada’s identity crisis. Arthur gives details about his trial before the Supreme Court of British Columbia in late 2015, where he faced charges under the Canadian Criminal Code, sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” legislation for “willfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin.” Arthur has been under attack by B’nai Brith Canada since 2007 for his non-violent expression of political views, along with Brian Ruhe, who was fired from five teaching positions at Capilano University for bringing his observations to light via YouTube.

 Paul, who covered the Topham trial, was also dismissed from an English instructor position by the Peel Board of Education in 1997, after years of pressure from Jewish lobby groups who hated his support for victims of censorship and his opposition to the displacement of the founding stock of Canada. He says the censorship spirit has seized much of the politically correct establishment of Canada.

Gilad appeared as an expert witness in the case, where he presented evidence explaining the clear dichotomies between criticizing Jews the people, the Jewish religion, and the Jewish-ness ideology. He is well versed in exposing the barbaric and evil political ideology known as Zionism and in addressing the tribal mechanisms that are unique to Israel’s Jewish elite. We discuss the outright hypocrisy and double standards regarding freedom of expression within the Canadian judicial system that the Topham case has revealed, and we also look at the ongoing demographic destruction that is being deliberately pushed by immigration laws designed “diversify” Canada. We consider the fascinating level of interests that Jewish lobby groups have in supporting immigration around the world and what advantage the Jews gain by diluting every other ethnic race. Jason comes in at the end to give his take on Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and other political engineering tactics that are whittling away at constitutional rights and the entire European cultural spirit that built Canada and the great West.

Canada Border Services Agency — Political Police & Censors

Canada Border Services Agency — Political Police & Censors

Paul Fromm Appears on Voters’ Echo

* Exposes mail opening and harassment by Canada Border Service Agency
* two and a half hour harassment; opening laptop and cellphone; total invasion of privacy

See More

VoteFrederick Fromm's photo.

Voters’ Choice Host Bahman Yazdanfar with guest Paul Fromm, Director of the

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Brandon Martinez Interviews Paul Fromm About Customs Harassment & Arthur Topham “Hate” Speech Trial — Abuse BY Process

Brandon Martinez Interviews Paul Fromm About Customs Harassment & Arthur Topham “Hate” Speech Trial — Abuse BY Process
 

Latest episode of The Martinez Perspective with guest Paul Fromm.

…Published on Feb 8, 2016

On this episode of the Martinez Perspective I am joined by Paul Fromm, a long-time free speech activist, White preservationist and director of the Canadian Association of Free Expression. We discussed Paul’s recent run-in with the “thought police” at the Toronto airport, who, on the orders of the most likely Zionist influence peddlers higher up in the Canadian government, harassed and finagled him in a clear act of state-sanctioned intimidation. Then we touched on some of the finer details of the Arthur Topham thought crime trial in BC, where Zionist hate mongers are seeking to send an elderly blogger to jail for publishing books that are already widely available online.

 
 
 
 

https://youtu.be/wKF8Ekh3Rqk

Paul Fromm – ‘Invading Our Lands; Silencing Our Voices’ — Talk to the London Forum, January 30, 2016

Paul Fromm – ‘Invading Our Lands; Silencing Our Voices’ — Talk to the London Forum, January 30, 2016

 
 
 
 
 
When any nation that is not part of ‘The Neo Con Empire’, for example China, silences the opposition to its governing regime by accusing its critics of ‘Hate’ and locking them away under ‘Hate Laws’ , the Western liberal media goes bezerk and fires off a volley of denunciations. However, the same media is hypocritically either strangely silent, or full of applause when its own liberal Western ruling regimes use the same methods and laws to imprison and silence their own dissidents. To be a dissident in the West these days is to be a defender of the true Western values and to be against the extermination of things we used to take for granted, such as: family; community; culture; nation, race and indeed the West itself. People of European origin in North America, as elsewhere in the world, are the victims of a cultural Marxist political and media elite dedicated to their replacement by massive Third World immigration. Simultaneously, there are strenuous efforts by the same elite to suppress criticism of this policy of dispossession by a variety of legal measures, (hate laws, etc.), media boycott and social sanctions for dissenters. Paul Fromm speaks extensively on immigration and free speech issues worldwide. He heads the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee and The Canadian Association for Free Expression. He has battled Canada’s oppressive internet censors and supported Ernst Zundel and David Irving. For the past four years, he has been media spokesman for the European American Heritage Festival, held annually in late October in Pulaski, Tennessee. He has a daily one hour commentary show on WhiteResistanceRadio.com. This autumn he covered the 12-day trial of Arthur Topham, (Radicalpress.com), who was charged with promoting “hate” under Canada’s notorious “hate law”.– Jez Turnner, London Forum.

Facebook’s War on Freedom of Speech

Facebook’s War on Freedom of Speech

by Douglas Murray
February 5, 2016 at 5:00 am

Facebook’s War on Freedom of Speech

 

  • Facebook is now removing speech that presumably almost everybody might decide is racist — along with speech that only someone at Facebook decides is “racist.”
  • The sinister reality of a society in which the expression of majority opinion is being turned into a crime has already been seen across Europe. Just last week came reports of Dutch citizens being visited by the police and warned about posting anti-mass-immigration sentiments on social media.
  • In lieu of violence, speech is one of the best ways for people to vent their feelings and frustrations. Remove the right to speak about your frustrations and only violence is left.
  • The lid is being put on the pressure cooker at precisely the moment that the heat is being turned up. A true “initiative for civil courage” would explain to both Merkel and Zuckerberg that their policy can have only one possible result.

It was only a few weeks ago that Facebook was forced to back down when caught permitting anti-Israel postings, but censoring equivalent anti-Palestinian postings.
Now one of the most sinister stories of the past year was hardly even reported. In September, German Chancellor Angela Merkel met Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook at a UN development summit in New York. As they sat down, Chancellor Merkel’s microphone, still on,recorded Merkel asking Zuckerberg what could be done to stop anti-immigration postings being written on Facebook. She asked if it was something he was working on, and he assured her it was.
At the time, perhaps the most revealing aspect of this exchange was that the German Chancellor — at the very moment that her country was going through one of the most significant events in its post-war history — should have been spending any time worrying about how to stop public dislike of her policies being vented on social media. But now it appears that the discussion yielded consequential results.
Last month, Facebook launched what it called an “Initiative for civil courage online,” the aim of which, it claims, is to remove “hate speech” from Facebook — specifically by removing comments that “promote xenophobia.” Facebook is working with a unit of the publisher Bertelsmann, which aims to identify and then erase “racist” posts from the site. The work is intended particularly to focus on Facebook users in Germany. At the launch of the new initiative, Facebook’s chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, explained that, “Hate speech has no place in our society — not even on the internet.” She went to say that, “Facebook is not a place for the dissemination of hate speech or incitement to violence.” Of course, Facebook can do what it likes on its own website. What is troubling is what this organization of effort and muddled thinking reveals about what is going on in Europe.

The mass movement of millions of people — from across Africa, the Middle East and further afield — into Europe has happened in record time and is a huge event in its history. As events in Paris, Cologne and Sweden have shown, it is also by no means a series of events only with positive connotations.
As well as being fearful of the security implications of allowing in millions of people whose identities, beliefs and intentions are unknown and — in such large numbers — unknowable, many Europeans are deeply concerned that this movement heralds an irreversible alteration in the fabric of their society. Many Europeans do not want to become a melting pot for the Middle East and Africa, but want to retain something of their own identities and traditions. Apparently, it is not just a minority who feel concern about this. Poll after poll shows a significant majority of the public in each and every European country opposed to immigration at anything like the current rate.
The sinister thing about what Facebook is doing is that it is now removing speech that presumably almost everybody might consider racist — along with speech that only someone at Facebook decides is “racist.”
And it just so happens to turn out that, lo and behold, this idea of “racist” speech appears to include anything critical of the EU’s current catastrophic immigration policy.


By deciding that “xenophobic” comment in reaction to the crisis is also “racist,” Facebook has made the view of the majority of the European people (who, it must be stressed, are opposed to Chancellor Merkel’s policies) into “racist” views, and so is condemning the majority of Europeans as “racist.” This is a policy that will do its part in pushing Europe into a disastrous future.


Because even if some of the speech Facebook is so scared of is in some way “xenophobic,” there are deep questions as to why such speech should be banned. In lieu of violence, speech is one of the best ways for people to vent their feelings and frustrations. Remove the right to speak about your frustrations, and only violence is left. Weimar Germany — to give just one example — was replete with hate-speech laws intended to limit speech the state did not like. These laws did nothing whatsoever to limit the rise of extremism; it only made martyrs out of those it pursued, and persuaded an even larger number of people that the time for talking was over.


The sinister reality of a society in which the expression of majority opinion is being turned into a crime has already been seen across Europe. Just last week, reports from the Netherlands told of Dutch citizens being visited by the police and warned about posting anti-mass-immigration sentiments on Twitter and other social media.


In this toxic mix, Facebook has now — knowingly or unknowingly — played its part. The lid is being put on the pressure cooker at precisely the moment that the heat is being turned up. A true “initiative for civil courage” would explain to both Merkel and Zuckerberg that their policy can have only one possible result.

Douglas Murray, a British writer, journalist and commentator, is based in London, England.

 

 

Former Political Prisoner Brad Love Denounces Anti-White Discrimination & Is Arrested Again

Former Political Prisoner Brad Love Denounces Anti-White Discrimination & Is Arrested Again

Imagine a radio advertisement repeatedly advising that a company was providing training – let’s say in operating a forklift – but to Whites only. The howls of protest would be immediate. The anti-racist and White-hating groups would fly into a frenzy. The human rights lobby would roar. There’d be a protest to the CRTC. There would be fiery editorials denouncing the company and the radio station. There would be questions in Parliament. Everyone from Ontario’s lesbian premier to the town drunk would denounce the station and the company. Almost immediately the advertising manager would be fired, perhaps even the station manager. All employees would be enrolled in mandatory brainwashing “diversity” courses. Meanwhile, the offending company would fire its president, publicly and abjectly apologize and then hand out fists-full of cash to various ethnic groups. You know it’s true.
 
 
Frederick Fromm's photo.

 

Well, now another reality. On January 18, former political prisoner Brad Love heard repeated ads on the town’s rock ‘n roll radio station Rock 97.9. The ads by security giant Garda offered 40 hours of training for security guards. The one catch is that this offer was for “natives” – that is, Indians – only. Totally racist and discriminatory! Fort McMurray resident Brad Love, despite the Stalinist probation conditions imposed on him, was determined to act. Fort McMurray is suffering severe unemployment. [Statistics Canada reports a 7.4 per unemployment rate in Alberta for January, 2016.] Due to the low price of oil, many oil patch companies are laying off workers. Brad first approached Garda. He asked for an application. “You’re not a status Indian or a Metis,” he was told. “You don’t look Indian.” In the end, he left with an application form.

 

His next stop was Rock 97.9 He approached the radio station to obtain a business card or letter head so that he would have precise information for his human rights complaint. Now, he couldn’t directly protest or express his political views.  He would have to be careful. In July 2012, having slapped him with an 18-month sentence for having sent non-violent information packages to Toronto Jewish groups  in supposed violation of his probation order,  Ontario Judge Kelly Wright imposed a three year gag order on Mr. Love,  rendering him a virtual non-citizen: “Mr.  Love is to refrain from any political speech or commentary to any media  outlet, political, cultural or religious group or organization, or  police organization.” Yes, that`s an Ontario judge, not one of Kim Jong-un’s judges in North Korea. His visit to the radio station was Kafkaesque. The receptionist wouldn’t look him in the eye. She acted strangely and refused to provide a business card.

 

Brad proceeded to file complaints against both Garda and Rock 97.9 with the Alberta Human Rights Commission on the grounds of racial discrimination. Mr. Love filed his complaint. On February 3, the Alberta Human Rights Commission contacted him. They were acknowledging and accepting his complaint against Garda. However, they advised, as telecommunications was a federal; matter, he would have to complain to the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

 

On Wednesday, February 3,  he was informed by his room mates that two police cruisers had come looking for him and had asked him to contact that RCMP detachment. Brad did nothing. Friday evening, February 5, CAFÉ received a call today from former political prisoner Brad Love. He was in custody at the RCMP station in Fort McMurray, Alberta, charged with “breach of probation,” for having visited the radio station. Note, he’d offered no statements or political opinions.  “The station puts forth an image of ‘rock ‘roll rebels,” Mr. Love says, “but when Brad Love shows up in the lobby asking for a business card, they call the RCMP.”

Mr. Love was arrested at 9:30 on Febuary 5 but not released until 4:30 the next day — an unusually long detention for an alleged non-violent offence. He did not get to speak top a Justice of the Peace until 6:30 a.m. The police wanted $1,000 bail. Mr., Love told the JP: “I’ve been in this town for nine years and have never spent a night in jail.”

“Maybe you should have,” snapped the JP.

“He’s a prejudiced …” said Mr. Love who had appeared before this man on previous occasions. Mr. Love had to post $250 in bail.

His paperwork charges him with attended the offices of KICS 98 Radio in violation of his probation order. KICS 98 closed its offices more than two years ago!

Mr. Love noted the deliberate delay in releasing him into a winter blizzard. “All the hobos and bums got out before me. I’m the only guy in here who regularly has a job.”

“Well, if you’re going to be like that,” his RCMP tormenters said to him and delayed him a bit longer.

Government Snoops Rifle Through Laptop & Newspaper Clippings in 2.5-hour Ordeal of Political Harassment at Toronto Airport

Government Snoops Rifle Through Laptop & Newspaper Clippings in 2.5-hour Ordeal of Political Harassment at Toronto Airport

 
Soft tyranny in new “Sunny Ways” Liberal Canada.
 
Paul Fromm’s shocking story of violation and bullying.
 
 
 
Frederick Fromm's photo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5b4EYcufdU&feature=youtu.be

SEND CHRISTMAS GREETINGS TO THESE IMPRISONED OR PERSECUTED REVISIONISTS



For the upcoming Christmas season, please remember our fellow German revisionists sitting in prison, being on the run, or being prosecuted. Send them a nice Christmas card or even a letter!
If sending letters into prison, abstain from any remarks that might lead to the letter being confiscated! “Illegal” statements can get our comrades into even deeper trouble.


These are our men/women “behind the wire.”

In the words of the old German folk song: “Die gedanken sind frei” (thoughts are free”).

Wolfgang FRÖHLICH (prisoner)
Steiner Landstr 4
A-3504 Kreims-Stein, AUSTRIA

Dr. Horst MAHLER (early release on probation)
Weidenbusch 13
D-14532 Kleinmachnow, GERMANY

Axel Möller (prisoner)
Kühlungsborner Str. 29a
D-18246 Bützow, GERMANY

Gerhard Ittner (trial ongoing)
c/o S. Rübel
Bessemerstr. 51
D-90411 Nürnberg, GERMANY

Vincent Reynouard (convicted, hiding in exile).
c/o Siegfried Verbeke
Italiëlei 203b, B-2000 Antwerp – BELGIUM

Dr. Sylvia Stolz (prosecuted)
Pfarrer-Grabmeier-Allee 10
D-85560 Ebersberg, GERMANY

Dr. Ursula Haverbeck (prosecuted)
Bretthorststr. 199
D-32602 Vlotho-Valdorf, GERMANY


Hear Brian Ruhe (Vancouver victim of Zionist persecution) Interviewed by Co-Host Paul Fromm, Wednesday, 10:00 a.m. EST

Hear Brian Ruhe (Vancouver victim of Zionist persecution) Interviewed by Co-Host Paul Fromm, Wednesday, December 9,  10:00 a.m. EST

Tune in to STORMFRONT RADIO (9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., EST) Wednesday, December 9, 2015

 
 
Co-host Paul Fromm will interview Vancouver revisionist videographer Brain Ruhe. Mr., Ruhe has been the victim of an organized campaign by Zionists to impoverish him and have him fired from a series of jobs as an instructor in Buddhism and meditation at Vancouver-area education institutions and community centres.
Frederick Fromm's photo.
 
Listen live to Stormfront Radio with Don Black & Roy
with co-hosts Paul Fromm and Don Advo. Followed by Dr. David Duke.
Weekdays 9:00-11:00am

Overview of the Arthur Topham Free Speech Case

Overview of the Arthur Topham Free Speech Case

 
Regina v Radical Press Legal Update # 25

December 4th, 2015

LegalUpdate123 copy.png

Dear Free Speech Defenders and Radical Press Supporters,

Screen Shot 2015-11-08 at 7.06.41 PM.png
 

The trial of Roy Arthur Topham by the government of Canada, aka “Regina”, finally got underway Monday, October 26, 2015 in Quesnel, B.C., twelve hundred and fifty-eight days (1258) after his arrest on May 16, 2012. The Indictment stated that Arthur Topham did “willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin, contrary to Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code.”

There was a marked difference between the previous 24 court sessions where Arthur and his wife Shastah had attended court.  In none of the earlier appearances was there any presence of RCMP officers yet now that the trial was actually beginning, there suddenly appeared an over abundance of police who commenced performing what turned out to be a very obvious, onerous, time-consuming and intimidating “security” check system, not only for those attending the trial but also for anyone from the general public who had to enter the provincial government building on other business related matters. It was definitely an “over-kill” approach obviously initiated by the Crown and the motives for doing so were suspected to be little more than an unabashed attempt at creating the illusion that this trial was of such supreme importance a high level of security was deemed necessary. Every person entering the building had to remove all their belongings from their person and then proceed through a body scanner. Following that they had to be additionally gone over with a special “wand” by a police officer to detect any metal objects that might still be on them.

When Supreme Court Justice Bruce Butler eventually arrived the bulk of the day was taken up with jury selection. A 12 member jury composed of eight women and four men were chosen from the local community. After that the trial commenced, running over the scheduled 10-day period to fourteen consecutive days and culminating on November 12th when the jury finally reached its verdict.

Twice charged
Of primary importance in understanding the nature and outcome of the trial is the fact that Roy Arthur Topham was charged TWICE with the same Sec. 319(2) criminal offence. The first time was the day of his arrest on May 16, 2012 and the second time was January 14, 2014. The wording of the second Indictment was identical to that of the first. The reason for the second charge, like that of the first, was so that Crown might try again to have Topham’s bail conditions altered in order to prevent him from publishing. These additional attempts (there were three in all) to increase the severity of the bail conditions were buttressed upon the questionable pretext by Crown that the police investigation was “ongoing” and therefore the second Indictment (Count 2) was merely a result of additional evidence gleaned from posts Arthur Topham had added to his website after his initial bail conditions ended on October 9, 2015 (when Crown failed to hand down their initial Indictment within the prescribed time frame allotted them).
From the time of his arrest on May 16th until October 9, 2015 Topham was not permitted to post anything to his site.

It’s fundamental to bear this in mind when attempting to understand why the jury concluded that Arthur Topham was guilty on Count 1 and not guilty on Count 2.

Weekly reports
Throughout the course of the trial weekly updates on what transpired in the courtroom were published onRadicalPress.com along with editorial commentary and photos. The “Report on first week of Supreme Court Trial R v Roy Arthur Topham” came out November 1, 2015 and can be found here. The second, “Report on week two of  Supreme Court Trial R v Roy Arthur Topham” can be found here. Rather than repeat what was said in those articles it’s suggested that readers go to them further information.
GILAD&BARCLAY.png
Expert Witness for the defence
The defence was most fortunate in being able to solicit and obtain the expert testimony of Gilad Atzmon, a former Israeli citizen, accomplished philosopher, scholar, writer and Jazz musician who graciously consented to appear on behalf of Arthur Topham free of charge. Gilad Atzmon’s testimony to the jury was covered on RadicalPress.com in a November 9, 2015 article titled, “The Expert Witness – Part 1 by Gilad Atzmon“.  Mr. Atzmon’s intellectual/literary forte revolves around his best selling book The Wandering Who? which is a serious academic work in the relatively new field of Jewish Identity politics.
Cross-examination of former Det. Cst. Terry Wilson and Crown’s Expert Witness Len Rudner 
[Editor’s Note: It must be stated here that until the actual transcripts of the proceedings are obtained the commentary below regarding cross-examination of these two Crown witnesses, in particular Crown’s Exert Witness Len Rudner, should be considered more anecdotal rather than precise and factual. Again, please refer to the two weekly reports mentioned above for greater detail on this portion of the trial.
Defence Attorney Barclay Johnson’s cross-examination of Crown’s two witnesses revealed to the court that both of these individuals had personal axes to grind when it came to their testimony against Topham or their actions (as in the case of Terry Wilson) while carrying out the investigation into Topham’s website.
Unfortunately, in the case of Crown’s Expert Witness Len Rudner, it wasn’t until after his testimony and cross-examination that the defence became aware of a very serious, glaring breach of legal protocol with respect to Rudner’s sworn statements to the court. The immediate result of this new-found evidence was a call by Defence for a mistrial based upon an accusation of perjury on the part of Rudner but that move on Johnson’s part was dismissed by Justice Butler as coming too late in the proceedings.
The Crown’s forte
Throughout the whole of the 14-day trial what stood out most for the defence (as well as many observers in the gallery) was the overwhelming volume of documentary evidence (all taken from the RadicalPress.com website) which the Crown downloaded on to the jury. Coupled with that fact was the additionally onerous presence of two bulky Binders which were of such poor quality they were virtually unreadable, thus making the task of comprehending the details of the evidence not only formidable but in all likelihood an impossibility for the jury to comprehend. In fact it wasn’t until the morning of Friday, November 6th, ten days into the trial, that new exhibits of Binders 3 & 4 were finally made available to jury members.
Charge to the jury
On the afternoon of Tuesday, November 10th, 2015 Supreme Court Justice Bruce Butler read out his Charge to the jury. On top of the other thousands of pages of online books and articles the jury was now given an additional 62-page document instructing them on how to go about deliberating on all of the evidence presented over the previous 12 days of the trial. After reading out the document to the jury Justice Butler then instructed them to retire and seek a decision on the two counts.
The Decision
The decision was rendered on the morning of Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 11:27 a.m.
Count 1: Guilty
Count 2: Not Guilty
Immediately following the jury’s decision Justice Butler thanked the jury members for having done their civic duties then dismissed them. Next he told Crown and Defence that court would reconvene at 1:30 p.m. at which time any additional matters related to the trial would be dealt with.
New Bail Conditions Sought by Crown
When court reconvened at 1:40 p.m. Crown immediately brought up the issue of changing Topham’s bail conditions again. Defence objected as did Justice Butler and a new date was set for a bail hearing; one which was to take place on November 19th but was subsequently changed to November 20th, 2015.
The bail hearing began at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, November 20, 2015 with both Justice Butler and Defence Attorney Barclay Johnson appearing via telephone. Crown counsel Jennifer Johnston and Arthur Topham were present in the Quesnel Supreme Court.
Justice Butler listened to Crown’s arguments for wanting severe restrictions on Topham’s ability to continue publishing on his website and then heard Defence’s arguments against such proposals.
It ended up being a very short session; one that culminated in Justice Butler’s decision to refuse Crown’s request pending the outcome of both Crown’s Sentencing position which was slated tentatively for January 25, 2016 plus the Constitutional challenge to Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada which was also set to be heard before Justice Butler during the same week of January 2529, 2016. Justice Butler did grant one small concession to Crown when they asked that a photo on RadicalPress.com, depicting from a distance the crowd of potential jurors lined up outside the courthouse on Monday, October 26, 2015, be removed from Topham’s website. Topham willingly consented to remove it and that concluded the bail hearing.
The Future and the Silver Lining: The Constitutional Challenge to Sec . 319(2) 
Once the initial shock of the guilty verdict in Count 1 had subsided and time allowed for a reconsideration of all of the events surrounding the trial it became apparent that the verdict of “Guilty” in Count 1 was, in reality, the key to opening the door for the Defence’s ultimate objective which was to challenge the Constitutional legitimacy of the actual section of the Canadian Criminal Code (Sec. 319(2) now containing the infamous “Hate Propaganda” legislation which threatens freedom of expression for all Canadians.
Back in the spring of 2015 on March 23rd Arthur Topham’s legal counsel Barclay Johnson had served a constitutional notice on the Crown. The purpose was to present before a Supreme Court Justice a Charter argument challenging the legitimacy of the now existing Sec. 319(2) “Hate Propaganda” legislation. Eventually the date of June 22nd, 2015 was set to hear the Charter argument in the B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver.
Topham’s Argument
The Issues that Arthur Topham wanted raised and which were included in his Memorandum of Argument were as follows:

• Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code constitutes an infringement of Section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

• The Crown bears the onus of justifying the infringement of Charter rights on a case-by-case basis.

• The present case is distinguishable from Keegstra on its facts.

• The infringement of Section 2(b) of the Charter is not reasonably justified by Section 1 in the circumstances of this case, and specifically:

The “pressing and substantial objective” of legislation must be defined narrowly for the purpose of a Section 1 analysis.

• The use of Section 319(2) in this case is not rationally connected to the pressing and substantial objective of preventing harms associated with hate propaganda.

• Criminal prosecution by indictment is not a minimal impairment of the Applicant’s Charter rights.

• The infringement of the Applicant’s Charter rights is disproportionate to any possible salutary effect that Section 319(2) could have in the circumstances of this case.

• The appropriate remedy is to read into the law a constitutional exemption, to the effect that Section 319(2) is not a reasonable limit on Section 2(b) in circumstances where the allegedly hateful material is legal to possess and lawfully available from other sources.

Arguments, Counter Arguments and Reasons for Judgment
For the full text of the Memorandum of Argument please go here and read it in pdf format.

The full text of the Respondent Crown’s Submissions concerning Charter S. 1 Justification and R v. Keegstra can be viewed here.

A copy of the Applicant’s Reply to Crown’s arguments can be found here.

Justice Butler’s Reasons for Judgment.

Conclusion
The future of Sec. 319(2) of Canada’s Criminal Code will depend in part on the outcome of the planned Constitutional challenge now scheduled to take place during the week of January 2529, 2016. In the interim period leading up to that challenge Topham will remain free to continue to publish and to carry on with his solicitations for funding in order to persevere with his efforts to have this unconstitutional section of Canada’s Criminal Code repealed.

Should the challenge to Sec. 319(2) fail then the next step will be an appeal of the guilty verdict in Count 1.

—–

In order to support Arthur Topham’s ongoing efforts to protect Canada’s Constitutional Rights and Freedoms as contained in the Charter, donations can be made online via his GoGetFunding site located at http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publisher-faces-jail-for-political-writings/. If one is unable or unwilling to use that mode of helping out they may also asset by sending either cash, a cheque or a Money Order to the following postal address. Please make sure that all cheques or Money Orders are made out to – Arthur Topham – and sent to:

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C.
V2J 6T8
Thank You!

Notice: ob_end_flush(): Failed to send buffer of zlib output compression (0) in /home/public/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5373