Author Archives: admin

ALBERTA LAW SOCIETY CHARGES LEVANT FOR MISCONDUCT FOR DISRESPECTING HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Posted on by

ALBERTA LAW SOCIETY CHARGES LEVANT FOR MISCONDUCT FOR DISRESPECTING HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

 

 
 

Ezra Levant is a Zionist, a self-promoter and a bit of a loudmouth. However, going back to his college days at the University of Alberta when he came to the defence of Ron Gostick’s Canadian League of Rights when an unholy tag team of communist professor David Lethbridge and the head of the Alberta Human were trying to pressure hotels not to host the League;s annual meeting, Levant has been a consistent supporter of free speech.

He was an outspoken opponent of the pernicious Sec. 13 (Internet censorship) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.. He used his bully pulpit on Sun News to skewer human rights commission censors and other menaces to free speech. More recently he has been a consistent defender of traditionalist Christian Trinity Western University against Christian hating law societies in Nova Scotia, Ontario and B.C. who have announced they will not recognize the credentials of graduates of TWU’s law school because students and faculty have to take a pledge to practise sobriety and to  refrain from sexual relations outside a heterosexual marriage.

Sadly, as we have pointed out in increasingly politically correct and fanatically Canada. the price of dissent is unemployment and poverty. His enemies are now seeking To get Levant disciplined or disbarred for being rude to our new commisars, human rights commissioners.

Levant explains.

Paul Fromm

Director

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

 
 

Ezra Levant: ‘Crazy’ prosecutions

Republish Reprint

Ezra Levant, Special to Financial Post | July 23, 2015 3:42 PM ET
More from Special to Financial Post

This October Ezra Levant will be prosecuted for being “publicly discourteous or disrespectful to a Commissioner or Tribunal Chair of the Alberta Human Rights Commission.”

Canadian PressThis October Ezra Levant will be prosecuted for being “publicly discourteous or disrespectful to a Commissioner or Tribunal Chair of the Alberta Human Rights Commission.”

It would be unprecedented to prosecute a journalist for having the wrong opinions about a government agency

Here we go again.

This October I will be prosecuted for one charge of being “publicly discourteous or disrespectful to a Commissioner or Tribunal Chair of the Alberta Human Rights Commission” and two charges that my “public comments regarding the Alberta Human Rights Commission were inappropriate and unbecoming and that such conduct is deserving of sanction.”

Because last year I wrote a newspaper editorial calling Alberta’s human rights commission “crazy.”

Have you ever heard of a journalist being prosecuted for being disrespectful towards a government agency? A journalist in Canada, that is — not in China or Russia.

I’ve been through something like this before. In February of 2006, I was the publisher of the Western Standard magazine. We ran a news story on the Danish cartoons of Mohammed and the deadly Muslim riots that followed. Being a news magazine, we included photos of the cartoons to show the central element of the story.

Muslim activists filed “hate speech” complaints against the magazine, and me personally, for reporting this legitimate news story. What followed was straight out of Kafka: a 900-day investigation by no fewer than 15 government bureaucrats and lawyers for the thought crime of publishing news “likely to expose a person to hatred or contempt.” Truth was not a defence; journalism was not a defence. The commission had invented a counterfeit human right not to be offended.

I spent $100,000 on legal fees before the commission dropped the charges against me — because it was taking such a beating in the media. Even the provincial cabinet minister in charge of the commission at the time, the Hon. Lindsay Blackett, told reporters the commission had become a “kangaroo court.” I guess he’s allowed to say that, but I’m not.

Over time human rights commissions have gotten much more scrutiny, and the federal human rights commission even had its censorship powers repealed by Parliament. But last year, Alberta’s commission stumbled back in the news. A Czech immigrant had failed the provincial engineering exam three times, so he complained to the commission that the exam was “discriminatory.” In a shocking ruling, it agreed and ordered Alberta’s engineering profession to lower its standards and pay the complainer $10,000.

I have an opinion about that. I think it’s: crazy. You may have the same opinion and, if you’re not a lawyer, you’re allowed to express it. I expressed it anyway. After all, I was a journalist and hadn’t practiced law in many years. My job was to express my opinion. Sun News hired me, as a journalist, to do exactly that.

This time the commission didn’t come for me. But one of its prosecutors did. Arman Chak filed a complaint to the Law Society of Alberta about my column. Even though I haven’t practiced law in years, I’m still a lawyer. That was his angle.

At first, the Law Society dismissed his complaint without even a hearing, as it does with other nuisance complaints filed against me over the years by my political opponents. It would be unprecedented to prosecute a journalist for having the wrong opinions about a government agency.

Alberta benchers aren’t always so fastidious about courtesy. Earlier this year Dennis Edney, Omar Khadr’s lawyer, stood outside the Edmonton court house, blaming Khadr’s legal situation on the legal system’s anti-Muslim “bigotry.” But like Chak, Edney is a law society bencher himself. He is not being prosecuted. Nor should he be — we need passionate lawyers, zealously advocating for their clients, even if they’re sometimes prickly.

To my knowledge the decision to prosecute me is unprecedented. Unlike Edney and his court-house remarks, I’m not even a practicing lawyer. I’m a journalist who happens to be trained in the law. There are tens of thousands of inactive lawyers like me in Canada. They include politicians like Peter MacKay and Thomas Mulcair. Sometimes these politician-lawyers are polite. Sometimes they aren’t. Two years ago, my fellow member of the Law Society of Alberta, an opposition politician named Rachel Notley, compared the Alberta Energy Regulator to a “banana republic.” It’s a quasi-judicial tribunal, like the human rights commission. But it’s unthinkable that the Law Society would have prosecuted her for being “discourteous” to a government agency. Because we live in a democracy and value public debate.

Well, I do too. And I’m going to keep calling the human rights commission “crazy” for the rest of my life. And the fact is that their old prosecutor is still trying to get me — that is a bit crazy, isn’t it?

_____________________

Canadian Journalist Faces Jail Time
For Calling Government Agency ‘Crazy’
by Sputnik News
July 24, 2015
Canadian lawyer and media personality Ezra Levant, who was cited by the Law Society of Alberta for remarks he made about the province’s human rights commission, said his prosecution is “crazy.”

In a March 2014 Toronto Sun opinion column titled “Next stop, crazy town,” Levant called out the Alberta Human Rights Commission’s ruling that the province’s engineering exam “discriminated” against an immigrant who failed the test three times. Levant also slammed the commission’s order to Alberta’s engineers to pay him $10,000 and lower their standards.

“But with human rights commissions, when you think you’ve hit rock bottom, you haven’t,” Levant wrote. “The crazy keeps going down. You gotta get out your shovel and dig to get to the crazy that’s underneath the crazy.”

Lawyer and then-Alberta Human Rights Commission member Arman Chak launched a complaint to the Law Society that same month, saying Levant’s comments were “inappropriate and unbecoming” of a lawyer, even though Levant had not practiced law in years.

The complaint was initially dismissed without a hearing, with the Law Society ruling that Levant was acting as a journalist when he made the statements about the Commission. But Chak appealed last fall, and the panel granted his appeal seven months later, paving the way for a hearing on the citations in October.

Interestingly, a month after Chak appealed the Law Society’s ruling in Levant’s favor, he was dismissed from the Human Rights Commission. Chak has since sued the Commission for wrongful termination and defamation.

In an opinion column published Thursday in Canada’s Financial Times, Levant writes: “Have you ever heard of a journalist being prosecuted for being disrespectful towards a government agency? A journalist in Canada, that is – not in China or Russia.”

“To my knowledge the decision to prosecute me is unprecedented,” he wrote. “I’m not even a practicing lawyer. I’m a journalist who happens to be trained in the law. There are tens of thousands of inactive lawyers like me in Canada.”

Levant said that he values public debate, and is “going to keep calling the human rights commission ‘crazy’ for the rest of my life. And the fact is that their old prosecutor is still trying to get me – that is a bit crazy, isn’t it?”

Topham “Hate Trial” to Proceed Oct. 26; Charter Argument Postponed

Posted on by
Topham “Hate Trial” to Proceed Oct. 26; Charter Argument Postponed
Dear Radical Press Reader,
It has been close to a month now since I last posted an article. This is a rather long time given the usual amount of information regularly furnished to the site and it requires further explanation.
Since the end of April I have been caring for an older brother of mine who came down with a serious case of melanoma (skin cancer). Being on his own and handicapped and living in North Vancouver I had little choice but to spend a great deal of time away from my home in Cottonwood, B.C. (approximately 700 km NE of Vancouver).
My dear brother David passed away on July 1st and since that time I’ve been dealing with all the legal matters associated with his death. All of this has taken a heavy toll on my time and energy and prevented me from carrying on with my normal line of work, i.e. exposing the Zionist New World Order agenda and defending myself against the spurious, politically-motivated Sec. 319(2) CCC “hate crime” criminal charges that were brought against me back in May of 2012 thanks to the machinations of B’nai Brith Canada and its agents working for the Jewish lobby.
It was during one of my trips to the coast that I attended the hearing being held in the B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver in June. That event and the outcome of it will be the subject of my next Legal Update. Suffice it to say here that the judge hearing the case, Justice Butler, declined to allow the Charter challenge to proceed prior to the pending trial set for October 26th, 2015.
What this means is that the case will proceed to trial although it is still uncertain as to whether or not the actual date set will remain fixed. This is due to the fact that now that the Charterapplication has been refused and the majority of the funds raised in order to pay counsel to represent me at the hearing are exhausted I am faced with having to raise another substantial amount of money in order to retain counsel for the actual trial in the fall. What that amount will be is not determined at this point. My current counsel was acting on my behalf on what in legalese is called a “limited retainer” which means that he was hired only to deal with the Charter application. The trial itself, which could run for ten days, will require additional funding upwards of possibly $40,000.00. The exact amount is still undetermined at this stage but it means that I will have to re-apply for another Rowbotham application in order to assist me in paying the cost of hiring counsel.
The procedure for doing a Rowbotham was initiated back in June when I approached the local Legal Aid office here in Quesnel and, as per their unreasonable policies, was refused based upon the amount of donations that I was receiving at the time. I then wrote to the provincial office in Vancouver requesting that they reconsider their decision and I am currently awaiting word from the head office. When they reply and refuse me a second time (which they inevitably do) then I can proceed with the Rowbotham application. Time of course is running out and it does take time to jump through all the legal hoops involved in applying for funding in this manner for the Attorney General’s office is not about to assist me in hiring counsel when, at the same time, they are hell-bent on convicting me of this spurious, politically-motivated “hate” charge. So the outcome of this next stage of developments is still very tentative and uncertain. If I cannot come up with the funds then I will be left with only one recourse and that will be to represent myself.
My GoGetFunding account is still active for those who may wish to assist in helping me to defray the cost of retaining their constitutional right to freedom of speech here in Canada. It will be a tough row to hoe to raise another $35 to $40 thousand dollars to fight this Zionist-created creature in the courtroom but one way or another the challenge must be met if Canadians wish to retain their most valued and fundamental right.
One final word on the planned Legal Update. I’m still not sure of my schedule over the next month or so as I am awaiting word from the lawyer who is dealing with my brother’s estate. I am currently at home but could be forced to return to North Vancouver any day and then my ability to focus on the update will undoubtedly be delayed.
My apologies to readers for all of this extra hindrance and the lack of posts. Hopefully this will return to normal in the next while.

 

Sincerely,
 
Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″

Capilano University Instructor Fired for Free Speech Videos

Posted on by

German Bashing Beats Crime Control for Homeland Security

Posted on by

German Bashing Beats Crime Control for Homeland Security

In the same week, one of tens of thousands of criminal illegals that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had failed to apprehend,murdered a California woman in broad daylight,  the same department denied entry to a Canadian political activist who is also a director of the Council of Conservative Citizens.

On July 1, Kathryn Steinle, a 32-year old woman, was walking with her father after dinner on Pier 14 in San Francisco. They were approached by Francisco Sanchez, an illegal immigrant from Mexico, who had seven felony convictions and had been deported five times. For no apparent reason, Sanchez shot Miss Steinle in the head. She died in her father’s arms, crying:  “Dad, help me, help me.”

Somehow DHS had failed to keep this violent illegal out and protect Americans. Even worse, San Francisco has declared itself a “sanctuary city” and refuses to enforce laws against illegals. Sanchez had actually been apprehended several months before he murdered Miss Steinle for pot possession and distribution. However, the City of San Fransisco refused to honor a “detainer” order from ICE and Sanchez walked free.

Far different was DHS handling of Paul Fromm, who had been invited to be the keynote speaker at a meeting of the American Freedom Party in Tehchapi, California. Passing through pre-clearance at Toronto’s Pearson Airport on his was to Los Angeles, June 26,. Mr. Fromm was confronted by agents who made it plain that he was being hassled and turned down because of his politics.

When asked what his purpose for travelling was, Mr. Fromm replied that he was speaking to the American Freedom Party near Bakersfield. “That’s a White supremacist group.”  he was informed.

Sent to secondary inspection, he was detained for three hours. When he was finally questioned, the issue of “White supremacy” again came up. Mr. Fromm said the AFP is not White Supremacist and does not seek to impose American ways on other countries and is, in fact, isolationist. Relying in Wikipedia, the agent said that Mr. Fromm or  the AFP had “totalitarian affiliations.”

Mr. Fromm was  then asked to prove he was not being paid by the AFP. He said it was hard to prove a negative. He was told to provide information about the conference “who, what, where, when” and that there was no remuneration. He was also told to provide tax slips that show employment in Canada.

Mr. Fromm rebooked his flight to an evening flight, returned to his Port Credit home and obtained copies of the necessary tax slips and a detailed invitation FAXed by  AFP president William Johnson.

When he returned to catch his flight, he was sent immediately to secondary inspection without even a question being asked. Clearly, they were waiting for him. The bored agent who examined him showed no interest in the documentation he’d been asked to provide. His luggage was searched and some patriotic flags noted. The agent then told him he’d need a visa to enter the U.S. Most Canadians do not need a visa.

The AFP speaking engagement was missed. The next weekend Mr. Fromm had been invited to speak at Freedompalooza to be held in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. He applied for a visa on-line and obtained an expedited interview, June 30, still hoping to be able to fulfil the speaking engagement.

On attending the visa office at the U.S. Consulate in Toronto, Mr. Fromm was fingerprinted and then seen by an agent.

He explains:  ” She asked me why I was applying for a visa. I showed her the sheet that instructed me that I needed one. I told her that I had looked at the Section of the INA on my sheet and could not see how it applied to me.”

“That’s their way of saying they don’t didn’t want you in the United States,” she advised him in a matter-of-fact manner. “You had Nazi flags” in your suitcase, she said. Mr. Fromm told her there were no Nazi flags.

She, then. asked him when he came from Germany.” I told her I was born in Colombia, as it says on my passport.  My Canadian born parents had been working in the oil business there. A few minutes later, she asked whether my father had served in the German Army. I told her no. My late father was a Canadian and served in the Royal Canadian Navy in  WW II and my mother had served in the Canadian Army as a nurse.”

After some consultation the agent said that further information and a further administrative review would be necessary to issue the visa. The process would take three months.

Mr. Fromm missed Freedompalooza and has had to cancel several other speaking engagements this summer in the U.S.

“I feel that I’m the victim of German-bashing,” Mr. Fromm says. “If I had a long criminal record and had snuck in from Mexico, there would have been no problem.”

See a more complete account on this recent video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd5BLgc7y6g

 

AUDIO INTERVIEW & ARTICLE: Free Speech Activist Denied Entry Into U.S

Posted on by

AUDIO INTERVIEW & ARTICLE: Free Speech Activist Denied Entry Into U.S.

AUGUST 13, 2015   AFP   NO COMMENTS
31_32_Canadian_TSAAFP AUDIO INTERVIEW

Podcast Play Button

Paul Fromm is a Canadian free speech activist who has made many trips to the United States to speak at various conferences. While at the airport to head to California for one such speaking engagement, Paul was given the third degree when he attempted to board his flight.

Dave Gahary had a chance to sit down with Paul, who recounted his experience with DHS agents at Toronto Pearson International Airport on June 26, who made it plain that he was being hassled and turned down because of his politics, in this disturbing interview (44:55).

Donate to us

Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, is the host of AFP’s ‘Underground Interview’ series.

Be sure to check out all of AFP’s free audio interviews. You’ll find them on the HOME PAGE, in the ARCHIVES & in the AUDIO section.

It’s 1984 on the Canadian Border

• Free speech activist denied entry to U.S.—but illegal aliens receive ‘sanctuary’

By Paul T. Angel

In the same week that one illegal alien out of tens of millions currently hiding out in the United States murdered a California woman in broad daylight, U.S. law enforcement denied entry to a conservative Canadian activist who was coming to the U.S. to attend a political conference.

On July 1, Kathryn Michelle “Kate” Steinle was senselessly murdered in front of her father by Francisco Sanchez, an illegal immigrant from Mexico who had seven felony convictions and had been deported five times. For no apparent reason, Sanchez shot Miss Steinle in the head. She died in her father’s arms, crying: “Dad, help me, help me.”

U.S. law enforcement at all levels—from the nation’s top prosecutor all the way down to the local beat cops in San Francisco—had all failed to keep this violent criminal off the streets.

Now compare that to the way that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) handled Paul Fromm who had been invited to be the keynote speaker at a meeting of the American Freedom Party in Tehachapi, California.

AMERICAN FREE PRESS recently had the opportunity to speak with Fromm about his ordeal at the hands of U.S. authorities while trying to visit the country.

Passing through pre-clearance at Toronto Pearson International Airport on his way to Los Angeles, on June 26, Fromm was confronted by agents who made it plain that he was being hassled and turned down because of his politics.

When asked what his purpose for traveling was, Fromm replied that he was speaking to the American Freedom Party near Bakersfield.

“That’s a white supremacist group,” a DHS agent replied.

Sent to secondary inspection, Fromm was then detained for three hours.

When he was finally questioned, the issue of “white supremacy” again came up. Fromm said the party is not a white supremacist group and does not seek to impose American ways on other countries. It is, he added, pro-isolationism.

Relying on Wikipedia, the agent said Fromm and the American Freedom Party had “totalitarian affiliations.”

Fromm said he was then asked to “prove I was not being paid by the American Freedom Party.”

The Canadian activist responded that it was hard to prove a negative.

He then was told to provide information about the conference—“who, what, where, when”—and that there was no remuneration. He was also told to provide tax slips that showed employment in Canada.

Fromm rebooked his flight to an evening flight, returned to his Port Credit home and obtained copies of the necessary tax slips and a detailed invitation from American Freedom Party president William Johnson.

When Fromm returned to catch his flight, he was sent immediately to secondary inspection without even a question being asked.

Clearly, agents were waiting for him. The bored agent who examined him showed no interest in the documentation he’d been asked to provide. His luggage was searched and some patriotic flags noted. The agent then told him he’d need a visa to enter the U.S. Most Canadians do not need a visa.

Unfortunately, Fromm said he missed the speaking engagement at the American Freedom Party.

The next weekend Fromm was invited to speak at singer and activist Paul Topete’s Freedompalooza, which was being held in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Fromm said he applied for a visa online and obtained an expedited interview, June 30, still hoping to be able to attend the gathering.

On attending the visa office at the U.S. Consulate in Toronto, Fromm was fingerprinted and then seen by a Canadian agent.

“She asked me why I was applying for a visa,” said Fromm. “I told her that I could not see how it applied to me.”

Fromm said the female agent told him: “That’s their way of saying they don’t want you in the United States. ‘You had Nazi flags in your suitcase,’ she said.”

Fromm added that he told her there were no Nazi flags.

He then was asked about his birthplace.

“When did you [come to Canada] from Germany,” Fromm said he was asked. “I told her I was born in Colombia, as it says on my passport. A few minutes later, she asked whether my father had served in the German army. I told her, ‘No. My late father was a Canadian and served in the Royal Canadian Navy in WWII and my mother served in the Canadian army as a nurse.’ ”

Fromm was then told that the agent would need that further information and a further administrative review would be necessary. That process, he was told, would take three months.

As a result, Fromm said he missed Freedompalooza and has had to cancel several other speaking engagements in the U.S. this summer.

“I feel that I’m the victim of German-bashing,” said Fromm. “If I had a long criminal record and had snuck in from Mexico, there would have been no problem.”

The Barnes Review

Paul T. Angel is the managing editor of THE BARNES REVIEW historical magazine and the art and production director for AMERICAN FREE PRESS. He received his BA in Design from American University in 1983 with a focus on graphic design, art history and marketing. Paul invites you to request a free sample copy of TBR—the most honest history magazine in America—by calling 1-877-773-9077 toll free or writing TBR, P.O. Box 15877, Washington, D.C. 20003.

 

– See more at: http://americanfreepress.net/?p=27216#sthash.B5kDIsBo.dpuf

Vancouver Man Fired for Historical Dissent

Posted on by

Vancouver Man Fired for Historical Dissent

On Dominion Day, some call it Canada Day, many commentators reminded Canadians how much they have to be grateful for. Many burbled on about Trudeau phony Charter (of limited Rights and Freedoms). They cited freedom of speech. Don’t believe it for a moment. Brian Ruhe of Vancouver, who runs a meet up group on UFOs/ Conspiracy Theories and has posted some you tubes of speeches on historical revisionism, is the latest Canadian to face poverty: job loss is the price, on your own time, away from work, for expressing politically incorrect opinions.

CAFE Director Paul Fromm spoke to his group on Sunday May 2 in Vancouver on the menace posed by Bill C-51. Mr. Ruhe recorded  a YouTube of the talk and posted it on the Internet.

 

Frederick Fromm's photo.

On May 12, he received a phone call from  someone calling himself “Lama Tsewang.” He is not Oriental. Mr. Ruhe says: “He is a Jew and a Canadian  Tibetan Buddhist lama named Lama Tsewang.” [It’s a weird old world!] The caller said: “Your students will know.” Mr. Ruhe teaches Buddhism and meditation at a number of venues in Vancouver. The caller continued: “The B’nai Brith is after you now. The school board will know about you. You’re a fascist, There is no free speech for fascists. The school board will know. I’ll make sure that you are fired. Fascism doesn’t deserve free speech. No free speech for fascism. Paul Fromm is not about free speech and anyone who brings him here cannot teach in a Buddhist temple. If you want to speak the truth, why did you bring Paul Fromm to speak?”

 Well, apparently, these were not idle threats. Clearly, calls were made and freedom of speech, great in the abstract, means little to many weak employers. Brian Ruhe, a successful and popular instructor, is out of a job. 

He explains:  “Today Friday July 3, I spoke on the phone with Bettina Boyle at Capilano University. She is the Programme Manager at Continuing Studies & Executive Education.  They are dropping me and trying other instructors but will keep me on file in case there is more demand. She said the evaluations of my courses  — Mindfulness Meditation for Stress Reduction —  were good and the attendance was good.

So, I said that didn’t make sense; if my evaluations were good then they should keep me. That’s what the other institutions have done. She sounded unsure of herself and said they decided on this a few months ago when this decision was made before she came.

Then she said they will get someone else for the fall and maybe they could consider me for the winter. I said that didn’t make sense either, because there is so little time, they should keep me for the fall since there’s no time now. They should have told me this months ago if they already knew they were dropping me, I said.

I said I believed that the real reason was because of my YouTube videos as I talk about Jewish supremacy and the revisionist history of World War II. She said she would check if there was another reason and call me back. She called back about five minutes later and admitted that they did have complaints and the reason I described was the reason why I was dropped, she admitted. She said they had to be really careful about these things. (So she lied initially.) I said I felt this is a free speech issue so what they’re doing isn’t right. She wouldn’t change her decision so I said I will challenge this. I have over 500 YouTube videos and I could make a video about this, I told her. She said I have the right to do that. I said I understand that, and I asked if that was all? It was, so we finished the conversation and then hung up.

The West End Community Centre didn’t give me a reason. This week I was also fired from the Burnaby School Board but they didn’t tell me the true reason, which is the same. Linda at the Burnaby School Board said that the reason was because they were phasing out some general interest courses in favour of courses which trained people for a job.”

 

I Have a Right to Hear ‘Hate’ Speech

Posted on by

I Have a Right to Hear ‘Hate’ Speech

Wouldn’t it be nice if the police spent their time policing what people do rather than policing what they say?

Don’t get me wrong. I hate ISIS. And I think anyone—especially a Canadian-born guy—who converts to Islam and Islamism, is an idiot. BUT. The arrest of Aaron Driver for merely twitting support for ISIS is both ridiculous and outrageous. As I understand it, the police have prohibited him from twitting or owning a computer (!!!!!!) Shouldn’t this ring alarm bells for us? What if the government one day designates the Swedish Democrats, or UKIP, or PEGIDA as ‘hate’ groups, and passes a law that stipulates that anyone in Canada who declares support for such organizations be apprehended, held for two weeks, electronically monitored and deprived of communicating over the Internet? I don’t think that scenario is far-fetched. In fact, I see it coming just over the horizon.

If we truly support freedom of expression in this country, we must support freedom of expression for those whose ideas we abhor. Freedom of speech means nothing if it is only to apply to ideas which we approve of. Authorities have the right and the obligation to monitor those who they believe are capable of committing terrorist acts, but I don’t believe they have a right to intercede simply because someone declares his support for terrorists and ‘enemies of the state’.

There is much talk today about youth being “radicalized” by what they read on the Internet. But oddly, little mention is made of youth being radicalized in the ‘One Party’ classrooms of Indoctrination University, where they fed a diet of cultural relativism and anti-Western Leftist propaganda. And there is an abundance of websites that echo that dogma too. Some of them even heap praise upon murderers like Che Guevera. If you are a ruthless killer in the service of “anti-colonialism” you are on the side of the angels.

Can disturbed and alienated individuals be “inspired” to commit acts of violence by what they read? Of course they can. Two of them were “inspired” by reading Catcher in the Rye. Two of them were “inspired” by the Turner Diaries.  Many,  like Charles Manson,  were “inspired” by rock lyrics. At least a hundred thousand Muslims are “inspired” by the Koran to do unspeakable things. Dylan Roof was apparently “inspired” by what he read on some ‘White Nationalist” websites.  Some people could even be “inspired” by what they read in the Yellow Pages or on a milk carton.

Every book or speech or website has the potential to inspire angry individuals on the edge to do anything.  Does that mean that government should be empowered to ban everything? How far along that road are we going to go? If some speech is to be banned and others not, what objective criteria can be found to determine what is over the line? Who gets to determine what is unacceptable? For ‘Progressives’ the answer is clear: Progressives. The possibility that one day the tables could be turned on them is beyond their comprehension.

I am not prepared to grant any government or any agency of the government the right to decide what is hateful and what is not. If the state  has the power to do that, then I am as vulnerable as is any fellow traveller of any cause the government deems unacceptable or dangerous. If this sounds like I am an ‘absolutist’ on this issue, I am not. Obviously there is a difference between voicing support for the actions of violent people, and inciting people to commit violent acts. Even the First Amendment makes allowance for some restrictions on speech. But that is not an open door for the kind of censorship, harassment, intimidation, punishment and persecution we are seeing now, particularly on the Canadian side of the border—and in many European states as well—Sweden and the UK being the best examples. Aaron Driver is not a terrorist or intent on becoming one. He is just a fool. And fools have a constitutional right to be fools.

But this is really not about Aaron Driver’s rights. It is about mine. I have a right to read ‘hate’ literature. I have a right to hear ‘hate’ speech. I have that right because any citizen in an authentic democracy has a right to make up his own mind about whether a given speech is meritorious or nonsensical. If citizens are not to be entrusted with that right, if their judgment is not to be trusted, then why are they given the right to vote? Why bother with elections? Why have a democracy? And why fund universities and college campuses who presently strangle the free exchange of ideas with Orwellian speech codes?

And by the way, the emotional state of a speaker is irrelevant. I don’t care whether a speaker is motivated by hate, love, infatuation envy, greed or any of the deadly sins. I don’t care if he or she is a nasty ‘bigot’ of bad character or Mother Theresa.  What matters to me is the content of his speech and its veracity. It’s God’s job to judge character. My job is to judge ideas.

I  heard what Mr. Driver’s has had to say about ISIL, as did millions of other TV viewers. I don’t think that any government agency or police force should be authorized to prevent other Canadians from hearing it too. It is as simple as that.

Read this extract from CBC News Manitoba:

Jeff Gindin, who has been a defence lawyer for more than four decades, calls the case unusual. He says it is contrary to all basic principles of criminal law. “So far there’s no real law that I’m aware of that when you think someone might commit an offence that you would then have the right to arrest them prior to that,” said Gindin, who is not representing Driver, but is following the case out of interest.

Using social media for evidence is becoming more common, he said.

“Normally, you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt to charge someone with an offence. Here you have to have some reason to suspect that they may be contributing in some way to terrorist activity,” Gindin said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-isis-supporter-aaron-driver-to-stay-in-custody-for-2-more-weeks-1.3105716

Take note of what I have underlined. Be careful about what you say on social media. You are not living in a free country anymore.

PS According to CBC News, Driver grew up in London, Ontario. That doesn’t surprise me. London seems to be the epicentre of far-left lunacy. And the University of Western Ontario  must have a lot to do with that. The NDP MP for London-Fanshawe, boomer bimbo Irene Mathyssen, went through the UWO conveyor belt and as could have been predicted, emerged as a mindless moron.  I recall a friend of mine locking horns with her some 7 years ago, and her pathetic pathological altruism was evident. When she was reminded that Canada has the highest per capita immigration intake in the world, her biggest beef was that the government was not processing immigrant applications fast enough!

However, even a brainless bimbo has the right to utter nonsense. But the likes of Mathyssen  and her political collaborators have no right to deny people who do not share her perspective the right to publically contest it on a level playing field. She and people of her ilk have no right to impose a trendy ‘progressive’ version of sharia-like speech constraints on the infidels of the ‘far right’.  She is as much or more an enemy of democracy as Aaron Driver.

Tim Murray

June 26, 2015

— “Retain the power of speech no matter what other power you may lose… Do what you will, but speak out always. Beshunned, be hated, be ridiculed, be scared, be in doubt, but don’t be gagged. The time of trial is always. Now is the appointed time” John Jay Chapman – 1900 “Candour before tact, honesty before diplomacy.” Tim Murray – 2006

Toronto Journalist Protests Against Flag Shop Removing the Confederate Flag

Posted on by
Toronto Journalist Protests Against Flag Shop Removing the Confederate Flag
 
To: Susan Braverman
Dear Susan,
President of The Flag Shop,
 
susan@textileimage.ca


I came across your website since your business is located in Canada, and the Confederate Battle Flag is still indexed as being available in both fabric flags and decal stickers.

Though when I tried to place an order I was appalled when I was redirected to a notice that your company has banned the flag permanently.

In your “Press Release” you obviously used this to ban ANY flag you assume would offend historically ignorant zombies including “the flag of apartheid-era South Africa”.

Yet you still sell the flags of the old Soviet Union, Maoist China, North Korea, Castro’s Cuba, North Vietnam, Sierra Leone… not to mention almost every mass murdering tin pot banana republic in Africa and Asia. So, your state that the Confederate Battle Flag (which was never the actual flag of the Confederate States of America) is “a symbol for hate and racism”. This is pathetic considering your unwavering support of the genocide of FAR OVER A HUNDRED MILLION people. You also have NO problem selling the so called “post-apartheid-era” African National Congress flag. This brutal Marxist terrorist regime that committed unquestionable ethnic cleansing of white founding settlers by burning them alive with gasoline and rubber tires.

Many national flags you sell today are *STILL* symbols of repressed Communist hell holes where human rights violations and genocide are government policy. I am not going to try and educate you on the true facts surrounding the War of Northern Aggression, nor do you actually care.

You are just another putz who jumped on the politically correct bandwagon, fearing a loss in revenue from sales of Rainbow Flags, Stars of David, and mass-extermination paraphernalia from multicult sheeple with a credit card. The fact you used the banning of the Stars and Bars to advertise some ungodly pink “Anti-Bullying” flag is a double standard insanity. I guess mass murder, terror, torture and rape is not bullying to you. Yet, somehow Southern Pride is.

You, madam, make me sick!

 
Robert James

 

    • The maximum quantity allowed for purchase is 0.

Confederate Battle Flag

Double click on above image to view full picture

Zoom Out

Zoom In

MORE VIEWS
Confederate Battle Flag
PRODUCT ID: UTCON

PRICE: CA$0.00

Be the first to review this product

This product is permanently unavailable.
Confederate Battle Flag often referred to as The battle flag of the Confederacy, it was the design that was the basis of more than 180 separate Confederate military battle flags.

THIS PRODUCT IS PERMANENTLY UNAVAILABLE.

 

The Flag Shop halts sales of Confederate Battle Flag

Vancouver, BC (June 24, 2015) – The Flag Shop announces that, effective Monday June 22, all thirteen locations of The Flag Shop have removed the Confederate Flag (or Battle Flag of North Virginia) from the stock product line.

“The Flag Shop offers all of the current flags of the US States as well as a number of historical flags,” says Susan Braverman, President of The Flag Shop, “but when a historical US flag is increasingly used by racist groups as a symbol of hate, it makes me sick to my stomach. I knew it was time for us to remove the Confederate Flag from our stores.”

The Flag Shop has added the Confederate flag to its list of flags that will not be sold to the public. This list includes the flags of World War II Germany, the flag of Rhodesia, and the flag of apartheid-era South Africa. Museums, the film industry, and others with a genuine historical need may still contact us and will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

The Flag Shop does not condone or allow racism or racist behaviour in any way, shape or form and we are doing what we can to support positive messages of dignity, equality, diversity and safety amongst all Canadians. We are national advocates of Anti-Bullying, proud supporters of PRIDE and the LGBT+ communities and committed to the teachers of our children throughout Canada.

Businesses and government agencies interested in advocating positive corporate social responsibility and acting for the benefit of society are invited to contact The Flag Shop to discuss how we might work together in Canada.

Absurd: Judge Won’t Consider Charter Objection Until AFTER Topham “Hate Speech” Trial

Posted on by

Absurd: Judge Won’t Consider Charter Objection Until AFTER Topham “Hate Speech” Trial

 
 “Hate speech” trials are an abuse BY process. The judge’s decision is absurd. He’s saying, “put Topham through the expense and trauma of a trial and then will decide whether the whole proceeding is constitutional.” It is Alice in Wonderland persecution of dissent. 
 
If one doesn’t like Topham’s views go to another webpage. Actually, the persecution of Arthur Topham, first under the now repealed and notorious Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act and now under the “hate law” tends to validate Topham’s point that these are minority instigated prosecutions to shelter certain privileged groups, in this case, Zionists, from critique or criticism.
 
It has nothing to do with “hate”. You are completely free to mock, hate and vilify White Europeans and Christians. None other than the Chief Supremo Beverley McLaughlin defames Euro-Canadians in saying our effort to educate natives through the residential school system was “cultural genocide.” 
 
However,accuse Israel of genocide against Palestinians and you end up in court like Arthur Topham.
 
Paul Fromm
Director
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

Judge in hate speech trial won’t hear free speech charter argument before trial

By Glynn Brothen

(GLYNN BROTHEN /InfoTel Multimedia)
July 13, 2015 – 9:00 PM

QUESNEL – The hate-speech versus free-speech debate continues in a Quesnel courtroom after a judge decided to wait until the end of trial to hear constitutional arguments from the accused charged with promoting hatred.

Roy Arthur Topham, born 1947, is charged with promoting hatred against those of the Jewish religion or ethnic group on his website called the Radical Press. On the site, Topham writes anti-zionist content, has links to Hitler’s Mein Kampf and provides regular blog entries on his court case.

Last week in Quesnel Supreme Court, Justice Bruce Butler dismissed Topham’s application to have his constitutional argument of freedom of expression heard before trial.

“This can only be done at the conclusion of the trial. It would be unwise to embark on a consideration of the issues at this stage of the proceedings,” the justice said in his reasons for judgment. 

Topham was charged in 2012. He elected to be tried before judge and jury.

To contact a reporter for this story, email Glynn Brothen at gbrothen@infonews.ca, or call 250-319-7494. To contact the editor, email mjones@infonews.ca or call 250-718-2724.

 

Topham “Hate Trial” to Proceed Oct. 26; Charter Argument Postponed

Posted on by
Topham “Hate Trial” to Proceed Oct. 26; Charter Argument Postponed
 
Dear Radical Press Reader,
It has been close to a month now since I last posted an article. This is a rather long time given the usual amount of information regularly furnished to the site and it requires further explanation.
Since the end of April I have been caring for an older brother of mine who came down with a serious case of melanoma (skin cancer). Being on his own and handicapped and living in North Vancouver I had little choice but to spend a great deal of time away from my home in Cottonwood, B.C. (approximately 700 km NE of Vancouver).
My dear brother David passed away on July 1st and since that time I’ve been dealing with all the legal matters associated with his death. All of this has taken a heavy toll on my time and energy and prevented me from carrying on with my normal line of work, i.e. exposing the Zionist New World Order agenda and defending myself against the spurious, politically-motivated Sec. 319(2) CCC “hate crime” criminal charges that were brought against me back in May of 2012 thanks to the machinations of B’nai Brith Canada and its agents working for the Jewish lobby.
It was during one of my trips to the coast that I attended the hearing being held in the B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver in June. That event and the outcome of it will be the subject of my next Legal Update. Suffice it to say here that the judge hearing the case, Justice Butler, declined to allow the Charter challenge to proceed prior to the pending trial set for October 26th, 2015.
What this means is that the case will proceed to trial although it is still uncertain as to whether or not the actual date set will remain fixed. This is due to the fact that now that the Charterapplication has been refused and the majority of the funds raised in order to pay counsel to represent me at the hearing are exhausted I am faced with having to raise another substantial amount of money in order to retain counsel for the actual trial in the fall. What that amount will be is not determined at this point. My current counsel was acting on my behalf on what in legalese is called a “limited retainer” which means that he was hired only to deal with the Charter application. The trial itself, which could run for ten days, will require additional funding upwards of possibly $40,000.00. The exact amount is still undetermined at this stage but it means that I will have to re-apply for another Rowbotham application in order to assist me in paying the cost of hiring counsel.
The procedure for doing a Rowbotham was initiated back in June when I approached the local Legal Aid office here in Quesnel and, as per their unreasonable policies, was refused based upon the amount of donations that I was receiving at the time. I then wrote to the provincial office in Vancouver requesting that they reconsider their decision and I am currently awaiting word from the head office. When they reply and refuse me a second time (which they inevitably do) then I can proceed with the Rowbotham application. Time of course is running out and it does take time to jump through all the legal hoops involved in applying for funding in this manner for the Attorney General’s office is not about to assist me in hiring counsel when, at the same time, they are hell-bent on convicting me of this spurious, politically-motivated “hate” charge. So the outcome of this next stage of developments is still very tentative and uncertain. If I cannot come up with the funds then I will be left with only one recourse and that will be to represent myself.
My GoGetFunding account is still active for those who may wish to assist in helping me to defray the cost of retaining their constitutional right to freedom of speech here in Canada. It will be a tough row to hoe to raise another $35 to $40 thousand dollars to fight this Zionist-created creature in the courtroom but one way or another the challenge must be met if Canadians wish to retain their most valued and fundamental right.
One final word on the planned Legal Update. I’m still not sure of my schedule over the next month or so as I am awaiting word from the lawyer who is dealing with my brother’s estate. I am currently at home but could be forced to return to North Vancouver any day and then my ability to focus on the update will undoubtedly be delayed.
My apologies to readers for all of this extra hindrance and the lack of posts. Hopefully this will return to normal in the next while.

 

Sincerely,
 
Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″