Author Archives: admin

Lessons from the Charlie Hebdo Massacre: Immigrants MUST Be Culturally Compatible

Posted on by
Lessons from the Charlie Hebdo Massacre: Immigrants MUST Be Culturally Compatible
PORT CREDIT. January, 7, 2015. It was not long after I’d finished my stint as co-host of Don Black’s STORMFRONT Radio on the Rense Network today that I received a call from Colin Perkel of the Canadian Press.
 
In light of the massacre by Moslem fanatics of 12 people at the French satiric newspaper Charlie Hebdo, did I think such an attack could happen here in Canada? Yes, it certainly could and likely will. Last October, two Canadians soldiers were killed in Canada in the same week by converts to radical Islam, one of the killers a half Libyan.
 
 
Lessons from the Charlie Hebdo Massacre: Immigrants MUST Be Culturally Compatible PORT CREDIT. January, 7, 2015. It was not long after I'd finished my stint as co-host of Don Black's STORMFRONT Radio on the Rense Network today that I received a call from Colin Perkel of the Canadian Press. In light of the massacre by Moslem fanatics of 12 people at the French satiric newspaper Charlie Hebdo, did I think such an attack could happen here in Canada? Yes, it certainly could and likely will. Last October, two Canadians soldiers were killed in Canada in the same week by converts to radical Islam, one of the killers a half Libyan. "Why do you think so?" I was asked. Canada's lax and idiotic immigration policy has allowed people who do not share our values to enter this country. Canada is now home to over a million Moslems. Many are followers of radical Wahabbism. They hate the West. They hate our freedoms. They want to see us convert to Islam and adopt sharia law. They do not accept religious freedom or free speech. Worse, our policy of multiculturalism says all cultures are equal; that theirs is as good (or better than ours) and they are encouraged to maintain and practise their culture. To protect Canadians, if we are to have immigration at all, we must insist newcomers are culturally compatible. If they are not, they have no place here. France is paying the horrific price in blood to allowing a culturally hostile fifth column into their land. "Is this, then, about free speech?" I was asked next. Absolutely. Free speech is vital. Without it, you don't have a participatory democracy. Charlie Hebdo was satirical. It attacked Christians, often in the most vulgar of terms, and Moslems and others. I wouldn't agree with most of what they published, but freedom of expression is vital. "But, shouldn't there be limits on offending minorities?" he asked. Absolutely not! That's the veto of the heckler or, in this case, the terrorist. These foreigners must accept that they or their beliefs may be criticized. If they cannot accept that and insist on fire bombing or shooting critics (as they did in several attacks on Charlie Hebdo), then they have no place in our country. Ultimately, this is an immigration issue. The European and, I might add, the Canadian experiment with multiculturalism has been a colossal failure. Last fall, Canada began to reap the whirlwind with the killing of two unarmed Canadian soldiers right here in Canada by radical Moslems. Today, in volleys of targeted gunfire, France did too, with 12 dead and 10 wounded. Paul Fromm Director CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE p.s. Not a word of what I said appeared in Perkel's article on Canadian reactions to the Paris massacre. Why am I not surprised?
“Why do you think so?” I was asked. Canada’s lax and idiotic immigration policy has allowed people who do not share our values to enter this country. Canada is now home to over a million Moslems. Many are followers of radical Wahabbism. They hate the West. They hate our freedoms. They want to see us convert to Islam and adopt sharia law. They do not accept religious freedom or free speech. Worse, our policy of multiculturalism says all cultures are equal; that theirs is as good (or better than ours) and they are encouraged to maintain and practise their culture. To protect Canadians, if we are to have immigration at all, we must insist newcomers are culturally compatible. If they are not, they have no place here.  France is paying the horrific price in blood to allowing a culturally hostile fifth column into their land.
 
“Is this, then, about free speech?” I was asked next. Absolutely. Free speech is vital. Without it, you don’t have a participatory democracy. Charlie Hebdo was satirical. It attacked Christians, often in the most vulgar of terms, and Moslems and others. I wouldn’t agree with most of what they published, but freedom of expression is vital.
 
“But, shouldn’t there be limits on offending minorities?” he asked. Absolutely not! That’s the veto of the heckler or, in this case, the terrorist. These foreigners must accept that they or their beliefs may be criticized. If they cannot accept that and insist on fire bombing or shooting critics (as they did in several attacks on Charlie Hebdo), then they have no place in our country.
 
Ultimately, this is an immigration issue. The European and, I might add, the Canadian experiment with multiculturalism has been a colossal failure. Last fall, Canada began to reap the whirlwind with the killing of two unarmed Canadian soldiers right here in Canada by radical Moslems. Today, in volleys of targeted gunfire, France did too, with 12 dead and 10 wounded.
 
Paul Fromm
Director
CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE
 
p.s. Not a word of what I said appeared in Perkel’s article on Canadian reactions to the Paris massacre. Why am I not surprised?

 

“Hate speech laws – Repeal them,” St. Mary’s Prof. Says

Posted on by
2015-01-09

“Hate speech laws – Repeal them,” St. Mary’s Prof. Says

One thing we should do to increase our physical safety is repeal our remaining laws against hate speech.

Isn’t that claim outlandish? It might seem obvious that if we want to protect ourselves, we should instead police expression even more vigorously than we do now, so that violent people will be less likely to see or hear something that sets them off.

Well, of course, we know that by giving in to the heckler’s veto, we simply create more hecklers, and more raucous hecklers, at that. So maybe stricter laws against expression isn’t the answer. But how could having no anti-hate laws help us?

I don’t mean to argue here for repealing our laws against the expression of hate on the grounds that they are anti-democratic, or that they deform public discourse, or that they are contrary to the ideal of the moral autonomy of the individual, though I think each of those arguments is sound. I mean to explain how the laws we currently live under, mild though some think them (though Arthur Topham or David Ahenakew would disagree), encourage the offended to take up violence.

Those who lash out physically against people who (they feel) have ridiculed or offended them are lashing out because they believe they have suffered an injustice. My argument is that laws against the expression of hate endanger us because they affirm and encourage that belief.

That is to say, countries that have laws against hate speech proclaim through their laws that some targets of expression are, indeed, victims of injustice. As victims of injustice, they are entitled to restitution through the punishment of their assailants.

The police and the courts don’t always get things right, of course. Someone has defamed you by attacking your religion, and so you complain to the officials, but the officials decide that the speech that offended you didn’t cross the line. But it did, you think; or the line wasn’t properly placed. You believe that you are a victim of injustice, an injustice, moreover, that the state refuses to rectify.

How many times was Charlie Hebdo investigated for violating France’s laws against the expression of hate? At least twice, and both times acquitted. What’s left to do but attack it yourself?

If, on the other hand, Canadians were truly to embrace freedom of expression, and get rid of our laws that censor or suppress expression, we would thereby say to the world that being mocked or ridiculed or subjected to expressions of hate is not to suffer an injustice. That you have been insulted, offended, or upset by something someone said does not make you a victim, and you are not entitled to restitution or compensation.

Repealing our laws against the expression of hate would make us safer by removing from our culture official affirmation of the thought that a person’s hurt feelings merit official concern. Removing that thought would weaken the desire to take the law into one’s own hands when the state refuses to come to one’s aid.

My argument is speculative in that it contains a premise about cause and effect for which I cannot cite adequate evidence. According to that premise, removing laws that imply that one who has been offended or demeaned can thereby be a victim of injustice will result in fewer people thinking they are victims of injustice. If that premise is true, then that the attack on Charlie Hebdo was committed in France by Frenchmen isn’t entirely a coincidence, for France has stronger laws against the expression of hate than most other European countries and enforces them regularly.

But why think that that premise is true? Empirical evidence would be needed to settle the question. All I can say in defence of it right now is that, generally, legal culture affects the mores and attitudes of the individuals who make up a society.

For reasons of safety, then (along with all the other reasons), let us not accommodate even in the slightest demands that people be silenced, no matter what they say or how hurt people are by what they say. That would take offence out of the realm of law and politics, and that would (probably, maybe) lessen the chance that the aggrieved will style themselves victims and their violence justice.

Mark Mercer is Professor of philosophy at Saint Mary’s University, Halifax. He can be reached by e-mail: mark.mercer@smu.ca

–

WHATCOTT WINS FREE SPEECH TRIAL

Posted on by

WHATCOTT WINS FREE SPEECH TRIAL

 
REGINA. December 22, 2014. Christmas came early for evangelist and activist Bill Whatcott in a Regina courtroom today. He and U.S. activist Peter LaBarbera were acquitted on a charge of “mischief” for having set up a table to hand out literature and discuss traditional Christian teachings about homosexuality and abortion with University of Regina students earlier this year.
 
The Regina Leader-Post (December 22, 2014) reported: “Anti-gay activists Bill Whatcott and Peter LaBarbera were found not guilty of mischief in Regina Provincial Court on Monday.


Whatcott uttered “thank the Lord” after Judge Marylynne Beaton delivered her verdict.

“I’m very happy with the judge’s decision … and of course I believe she’s correct,” Whatcott told reporters.

LaBarbera, who lives in Illinois and heads Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, was not present, but “I’m sure he’ll be relieved,” said Whatcott.

LaBarbera and Whatcott were charged with mischief on April 14, after distributing flyers and displaying placards with pro-life and anti-gay messages at the University of Regina campus. They were asked to leave, refused and were arrested.

At the time, U of R provost Thomas Chase called the materials “graphic” and “disturbing.”

But “the validity of (their) beliefs are not in issue,” Beaton wrote in her decision.

“I find that the purpose of (their) attending the University of Regina was to communicate information and their actions were passive and non-aggressive,” Beaton wrote. “The university’s response was disproportionate to the peaceful distribution of flyers.”

Whatcott said he plans to return to the U of R in January — “you can count on that, unless I get hit by a car” — with a “flyer special for this occasion.” He aims to visit the University of Calgary campus on Saturday.”

 
Mr. Whatcott commented on his website: “The judgement is 27 pages, I cut and pasted a pertinent section to help you understand Justice Beaton’s reasoning.  Ms Patton is the head of campus security and Dr. Chase is Vice President of the U of R. When the judgment refers to “The Policy” it is talking about the University of Regina’s “Respectful Workplace Policy,” a document the university has been using as its pretext to silence debate on the issue of homosexuality:


Read complete judgment here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Ol-X … sp=sharing

Ms. Patton and Dr. Chase both testified to the effect that the decision to remove Mr. Whatcott was made to prevent students from feeling discriminated against. This is a sufficiently pressing and substantive objective. Freedom of expression is not an unqualified right. As stated again in the Pridgen decision at para. 124:

The University must be able to place reasonable limits on speech on campus in order, for example, to maintain a learning environment
where there is respect and dignity for all.

[68] The means used to prevent students from feeling discriminated against was the removal of Mr. Whatcott and Mr. LaBarbera. I do not accept that the accused’s removal, in order to protect students from the accused’s message, represented a minimal impairment on freedom of expression,” — In this case, the University’s response was disproportionate to the peaceful distribution of flyers and was not reasonable and demonstrably justified.

[69J In summary, I find that the Charter does apply to the University of Regina in this situation. I also find that Mr. Whatcott’s and Mr. LaBarbera’s actions were protected by s. 2(b) of the Charter and that the infringement on this right cannot be permitted under s. 1 of the Charter. Given my findings, Mr. Whatcott and Mr. LaBarbera were acting with legal justification pursuant to s. 429(2) of the Criminal Code.

Colour of Right

[70] The Crown has argued that it would be unreasonable to believe that the right existed, as Mr. Whatcott had been asked to leave by campus security several times over the last few years and was denied space by the University of Regina Student’s Union. He therefore knew that his form of communication was not welcomed at the University.

[71] However, Mr. Whatcott’s testimony left me with no doubt that he believed that he had a right to protest at the University of Regina under s. 2(b) of the Charter. Given that he had been successful before various courts in the past, I have no doubt that this belief was reasonable. His testimony also left me with no doubt that he does not think that the Policy applies to him, or perhaps to anyone. He testified clearly that the Policy is “rubbish” and that several universities, including the University of Regina, have abused their rights to exclude people and so do not have that right. However, if his belief that s. 2(b) of the Charter protects his speech is correct, then the Charter would overrule the Policy. Mr. Whatcott understands this principle.

 

 

While, of course, we agree with this judgement, it is frightening that the university seems unable to distinguish between “discriminatory” behaviour and the expression of an opinion. Neither Mr. Whatcott nor Mr. Barbera were providing goods or services and, thus, in any position to “discriminate.” They were offering opinions and discussing with interested students those opinions. And, by the way, isn’t that what a university is supposed to be — a place where ideas are discussed and debated, not an indoctrination centre for the cultural communist views now so in fashion among the intelligensia?

 
Paul Fromm
Director
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

Anti-gay activists LaBarbera, Whatcott found not guilty of mischief

Bill Whatcott and Peter LaBarberaAnti-gay activists Bill Whatcott and Peter LaBarbera demonstrate outside the Regina provincial courthouse ahead of the start of their trial on mischief charges on Oct. 30, 2014.

IHR Christmas Gathering A Huge Success

Posted on by
IHR Christmas Gathering A Huge Success
The Institute for Historical Review’s fifth annual Christmas party was held in the organization’s offices in Orange County, California. Socializing, a potluck supper and four talks filled a pleasant evening of fellowship and friendship.
 
IHR Director Mark Weber led off with a review of the past year. The IHR held nine meetings, including one in Virginia, this year with a roster of distinguished speakers, including Professor Tom Sunic and British lawyer Adrian Davies. The IHR maintains an active website . Mr. Weber has given numerous interviews with the U.S. and international press and has spoken at several meeting in Europe, including an enthusiastic reception at the London Forum.  The IHR has produced a number of important videos and has increased its distribution of books.

Frederick Fromm's photo.
 
Injecting fairness and reasoned historical commentary is the IHR’s role, he said. “If the U.S. judged Israel by the same standards we hold Afghanistan and Serbia to, we’d be sending bombers to Tel Aviv.”
 
Attorney Bill Halsey represented the IHR in the turbulent 1980s and 1990s, when their conferences were under attack by the radical terroristic Jewish Defence League (JDL). Venues were cancelled because of terror threats. The IHR’s offices were bombed and a warehouse filled with revisionist books destroyed, he recalled. The two main JDL culprits died in prison (on other charges), he noted. Mr. Halsey recalled how Congressman John Schmitz , an outspoken conservative on whose campaign he had worked, came to an IHR meeting and vouched for them to a frightened hotel owner, thus saving Frederick Fromm's photo.their conference. “All the IHR has ever tried to do is bring ‘history’ in tune with the facts,” he concluded.
 
Paul Fromm, the Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, discussed the attack on Christmas. This feast, he noted, “is among the most welcoming and inclusive, in the good sense of the word. The vast majority of Americans and Canadians celebrate Christmas, most as a religious event, but many who are not religious celebrate it as a cultural event as well. Yet, most government officials and many conformist businesses avoid the word and feel they must substitute ‘Seasons Greetings’ or ‘Happy Holidays’, as if the word Christmas itself was an obscenity.”
 
The fact is, he added, the word “Christmas” is an obscenity for militant Jews who have led the assault over the past six decades, Mr. Fromm explained. The attack on Christmas is the result of growing Jewish media and cultural influence in the past 70 or so years.
 
Quoting Edmund Connelly’s writings on the subject in Occidental Quarterly (2008), Mr. Fromm said: “While much has been written and reported about this assault, few want to situate the attack on Christmas within a larger set of conflicts between Jews and white Christians. But to understand the hostility toward Christmas in America, one must do just that, as Jewish Townhall.com columnist Burt Prelutsky bluntly did in his 2004 column The Jewish grinch who stole Christmas.
 

The blame for the brisk departure of Christmas observations in so many parts of American life now, Prelutsky argued, can be blamed on “my fellow Jews. When it comes to pushing the multicultural, anti-Christian agenda, you find Jewish judges, Jewish journalists, and the American Civil Liberties Union, at the forefront. . . . But the dirty little secret in America is that anti-Semitism is no longer a problem in society — it’s been replaced by a rampant anti-Christianity. “

 
He then referenced work by historian Michael Hoffman III: “Christmas is a problematic time for Orthodox rabbis and their followers since it celebrates the birth of the Jesus they hate. The rabbinic term for Christmas Eve is Nittel Nacht, a night they regard as accursed.  There is a rabbinic tradition of refraining from marital relations on Nittel Nacht. According to Baal Shem Tov, the founder of Hasidic Judaism, to conceive a child on Nittel Nacht will result in the birth of either an apostate or a pimp. 
 
The most prominent rabbinic custom commonly observed on Christmas Eve is to abstain from “Torah” (Talmud) study. There is an anxiety that one’s Talmud study may unwillingly serve as merit for Jesus’ soul, corresponding to the teaching that Talmud study gives respite to the souls of all the wicked. Refraining from Talmud study on Nittel Nacht also serves as a sign of mourning corresponding to the rabbinic belief that Jesus “was a false messiah who deceived Israel, worshipped a brick, practiced the magic he learned in Egypt and was born of a harlot who conceived while she was niddah (menstruating).”
 
There is a Talmudic custom of eating garlic on Nittel Nacht. The reason for this is attributed to the odor of the garlic which is reputed to repel the demonic soul of Jesus, which is supposed to wander on Christmas Eve like Scrooge’s dead partner Marley (cf. the rabbinic text Nitei Gavriel Minhagei Nittel). Another widespread rabbinic custom in Orthodox Judaism is to make toilet paper on Christmas Eve, a practice made popular among Hasidic Judaics by the Chiddushei Harim (cf. Reiach Hasade 1:17).
 
Contrast these grostesque Nittel Nacht mockeries from the lowest septic tank in hell, with the heavenly story of the Holy Family in Bethlehem —  the radiant Virgin and child, humble shepherds, and angels offering glad tidings of peace on earth to men of good will. Frankly, there is no comparison between Talmudic Judaism and true Christianity, and those who attempt to assert that Christianity has ecumenical similarities with the religion of the Talmud, are more deluded than the degraded practitioners of Nittel Nacht themselves.”
 
Again, quoting Edmund Connelly, Mr. Fromm noted: “One could spend a year, from one Christmas to the next, reading about the Gentile-Jewish basis of the War on Christmas. Some accounts are scholarly, while others are more popular. Some overtly point to the religious split as the source of the hostility, while others cautiously skirt around the issue.  Rush Limbaugh’s younger brother David is at pains not to name the source of the powerful anti-Christian bias he sees in our culture. Thus, in his 2003 work Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging War Against Christianity, he can open a chapter by writing “In the documented bias against Christians and Christianity in our modern culture, Hollywood and Big Media play very major roles.” But he ignores the highly Jewish nature of the American media in general and Hollywood in particular. In fact, the words “Jews” and “Judaism” do not even appear in his extensive index.
 

The same can be said for Bill O’Reilly — another culture warrior on the good side of the War on Christmas who never mentions the Jewish angle. But I love his poster anyway, even though he doesn’t want to say whom he is really fighting against. This silence is, of course, a wonderful comment on Jewish power in America. Still, by including a chapter such as William Lind’s excellent “Who Stole Our Culture,” it is obvious to even the halfway informed reader what civilizational rival they are discussing.Frederick Fromm's photo.

Lind goes as far as anyone in this book to frame the conflict:

The Frankfurt School was well on the way to creating political correctness. Then suddenly, fate intervened. In 1933, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party came to power in Germany, where the Frankfurt School was located. Since the Frankfurt School was Marxist, and the Nazis hated Marxism, and since almost all its members were Jewish, it decided to leave Germany. In 1934, the Frankfurt School, including its leading members from Germany, was re-established in New York City with help from Columbia University. Soon, its focus shifted from destroying traditional Western culture in Germany to doing so in the United States. It would prove all too successful.

Needless to say, this emphasis on the Frankfurt school moves the discussion in the same direction as Kevin MacDonald does in The Culture of Critique, where MacDonald describes the broad range of Jewish movements arrayed against the culture of the West, including Christianity.”

The first wave of the assault on Christmas, occurred from the late 1930s to the 1960s, Mr. Fromm explained. In 1934, at the urging of his wife Israel Itkovitz (better known as Eddie Cantor) wrote Santa Claus is Coming to Town. Jule Steyn, a Jewess from Bethnall Green in London, England, wrote the song Let It Snow, and Ivring Berlin, in the late 1940s, wrote the iconic White Christmas. “Now, there is nothing in and of themselves wrong about these songs. They celebrate the externals of the Christmas time, but neatly avoid the core meaning — the birth of Jesus Christ. By the 1960s, many Christian groups were rightly complaining that Christ had been taken out of Christmas: Jesus, Mary and Joseph had been replaced by Santa, Rudolf the Red Nosed Reindeer and Frosty the Snowman,” he added.

But the attack was heating up, Mr. Fromm explained. Then, quoting Edmund Connelly, he added: “In everyday parlance, this debate is often referred to as the one over ‘A Neutral Public Square,’and it has been going on for a long time.’Happy Holidays’ and ‘Season’s Greetings’  were not always ubiquitous greetings at the end of December. For instance, back in 1952, George S. Kaufman appeared on a popular television show one week before Christmas and was asked what he wanted for the holiday. He replied, “Let’s make this one program on which no one sings ‘Silent Night.’  The response from the audience (largely Gentile, one would presume) was fast and furious: Kaufman was removed from the show.

Fast-forward to 1982 and the popular Saturday Night Live could feature a skit called “Merry Christmas, Dammit!” This skit portrayed the relationship between Donny and Marie Osmond, two non-Jewish sibling pop singers, as incestuous, and the Virgin Mary was described as “that virgin chick” in a jazzed up version of “Silent Night.” Eddie Murphy — in his popular “Gumby” guise — reads children’s story in which Santa tears out the lungs of one of his elves because the elf asked for a sip of Santa’s hot chocolate. He ends the skit by saying “And to everyone out there — a merry Christmas! And to my producer, my director, my manager, and my lawyer — Happy Hanukkah, boys!’ Obviously sensibilities had changed by then, and the people calling the shots were Jews.”

Now, we have a concerted effort to remove “Christmas” while all the while wanting us to spend carloads of shekels to give gifts for the feast that dares not say its name. “Luckily, there’s been a strong push back from Christians and others. I urge you to give cards that say, ‘Merry Christmas.'” Mr. Fromm said.  “I urge you to return with a stern note any ‘Seasons Greetings’ cards from politicians. Finally, when shopping, patronize stores that mention ‘Christmas’ and, where you can, tell the management of stores that insist on ‘Seasons Greetings’ that you won’t buy their cheap imported Chinese junk, if they won’t acknowledge the name of the date the vast majority of us celebrates. You are not being ‘inclusive’,” he added, ” excluding yourself and your beliefs.”

The evening concluded with a provocative slide show by IHR Director, Tom Berrington. “We are in the period of Kali Yuga, in Hindu mythology, an evil time of turmoil and fever,” he warned: “We are never going back  to that golden era of the 1950s of rising living standards and endless opportunity. While there are many forces ranged against our people, we have certain advantages, especially our Faustian creative spirit,” he concluded.

Frederick Fromm's photo.

Whatcott Winds Up Free Speech Tour

Posted on by

Whatcott Winds Up Free Speech Tour

 
EDMONTON. November 16, 2014. Author and evangelist Bill Whatcott wrapped up a weekend speaking tour sponsored by the Canadian Association for Free Expression here today. The tour took Mr. Whatcott to Vancouver and Edmonton. His topic was “The War on Christianity: Can Traditional Christians Still Witness to the Truth in Politically Correct Canada?”
 
The veteran of several dozen arrests for counselling people outside Toronto abortuaries but within the prohibited gag zone or “bubble” zone, Mr. Whatcott reflected on the “double standard” of Canada’s justice system. He recalled one inmate who had received 30 days for numerous counts of shoplifting and Mr. Whatcott getting the same sentence for protesting outside an abortion clinic.
 
He described being jailed in Toronto’s notorious Don Jail. Political  prisoners “were always treated  more harshly.” At one point, he was put in cells with delusional or violent people. At another time, he was denied socks or blankets. When he got free speech supporters to call the prison and protest, the authorities told the prisoners on his range that they were losing their television privileges because of Whatcott. A prisoner punched him in the face. “They were clearly trying to make prison so terrible and dangerous to me that I would stop protesting,” he explained.
 
 
Whatcott Winds Up Free Speech Tour EDMONTON. November 16, 2014. Author and evangelist Bill Whatcott wrapped up a weekend speaking tour sponsored by the Canadian Association for Free Expression here today. The tour took Mr. Whatcott to Vancouver and Edmonton. His topic was "The War on Christianity: Can Traditional Christians Still Witness to the Truth in Politically Correct Canada?" The veteran of several dozen arrests for counselling people outside Toronto abortuaries but within the prohibited gag zone or "bubble" zone, Mr. Whatcott reflected on the "double standard" of Canada's justice system. He recalled one inmate who had received 30 days for numerous counts of shoplifting and Mr. Whatcott getting the same sentence for protesting outside an abortion clinic. He described being jailed in Toronto's notorious Don Jail. Political prisoners "were always treated more harshly." At one point, he was put in cells with delusional or violent people. At another time, he was denied socks or blankets. When he got free speech supporters to call the prison and protest, the authorities told the prisoners on his range that they were losing their television privileges because of Whatcott. A prisoner punched him in the face. "They were clearly trying to make prison so terrible and dangerous to me that I would stop protesting," he explained. At one rally of pro-life supporters at Toronto's Queen's Park in the late 1990s, about 30 members of the violent Anti-racist Action attacked the Christians with baseball bats and clubs with spikes in them. The police fought the goons off and arrested several. However, while peaceful pro-life picketers were repeatedly charged, the charges against the ARA thugs were dropped by Crown Attorney Michael Leshner, a well known homosexual, who was among the first in Ontario to "marry" another man. Somewhat later, Mr. Whatcott, then working as a nurse, cared for one of the ARA goons who admitted that he knew little about "racism" or "pro-life" but really just like to beat people up and hurt them. The goon was also a regular in the OCAP (Ontario Coalition Against Poverty) rent--a-mob which regularly staged violent protests. Mr. Whatcott had also been a supporter of Jim Harding, a Lutheran layman charged under Canada's notorious "hate law" -- Sec. 318 of the Criminal Code -- for distributing flyers highly ciritical of Moslems and their being granted a prayer room at Weston Collegiate Institute. Radical Somali Moslems showed up outside the court and threatened Mr. Harding with death. "There is a double strandard," Mr. Whatcott emphasized. "The Somalis were not charged for threatening death but Mr. Harding was charged and eventually convicted for expressing his opinion." Mr. Whatcott was promoting his new autobiography, Born in a Graveyard: One man's transformation from a violent, drug-addicted criminal into Canada's most outspoken family values activist. The book sold briskly at both meetings. You can order a copy of Born in a Graveyard: {$25 plus $10 postage} from C-FAR Books, P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, Canada.
 
 
At one rally of pro-life supporters at Toronto’s Queen’s Park in the late 1990s, about 30 members of the violent Anti-racist Action attacked the Christians with baseball bats and clubs with spikes in them. The police fought the goons off and arrested several. However, while peaceful pro-life picketers were repeatedly charged, the charges against the ARA thugs were dropped by Crown Attorney Michael Leshner, a well known homosexual, who was among the first in Ontario to “marry” another man.
 
Somewhat later, Mr. Whatcott, then working as a nurse, cared for one of the ARA goons who admitted that he knew little about “racism” or “pro-life” but really just like to beat people up and hurt them. The goon was also a regular in the OCAP (Ontario Coalition Against Poverty) rent–a-mob which regularly staged violent protests.
 
Mr. Whatcott had also been a supporter of Jim Harding, a Lutheran layman charged under Canada’s notorious “hate law” — Sec. 318 of the Criminal Code — for distributing flyers highly critical of Moslems and their being granted a prayer room at Weston Collegiate Institute. Radical Somali Moslems showed up outside the court and threatened Mr. Harding with death. “There is a double standard,” Mr. Whatcott emphasized. “The Somalis were not charged for threatening death but Mr. Harding was charged and eventually convicted for expressing his opinion.”
 
Mr. Whatcott was promoting his new autobiography, Born in a Graveyard: One man’s transformation from a violent, drug-addicted criminal into Canada’s most outspoken family values activist. The book sold briskly at both meetings.
 
You can order a copy of   Born in a Graveyard:  {$25 plus $10 postage} from C-FAR Books, P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, Canada.
 

Blasting the Persecution of Christopher Sandau

Posted on by
Blasting the Persecution of Christopher Sandau

http://www.thenownewspaper.com/news/north-delta-hockey-coach-fired-for-nazi-obsession-on-facebook-1.1496455# 

Tom Zytaruk
The Now Newspaper. 

So let me get this straight. Somebody with a politically incorrect belief system who did not share it with the kids he taught or coached should be fired because a person who holds such beliefs must be regarded as  a poor “role model”. As one parent said, “You can’t be a Nazi and coach kids’ hockey”.

OK then. Can you be a fundamentalist Christian and coach kids’ hockey? For a great many people, fundamentalist Christian beliefs are politically incorrect. Members of the Law Society in this province, for example, recently voted for a policy that would deny graduates of the Trinity College law school accreditation because of principles thought to be, well, “politically incorrect”.

Can you express support for the Conservative Party of Canada on your Facebook page and coach kids’ hockey? After all, many supporters of the Green, Liberal and NDP parties would consider Conservative ideas, particularly social Conservative ideas “politically incorrect”.

But hey wait, you say. Comparing fundamentalist Christians and Conservatives to Nazis is absurd. Nazism is a totalitarian ideology associated with the commission of some of the most horrendous crimes in human history. But guess what? So is Communism. In fact the “body count” of Comrade Stalin or Mao is many times greater than Hitlers’. Funny though, many people with a Communist past in Canada, like former BQ leader Gilles Duceppe for example, were never held accountable by the media for it. In Canada, being a student Marxist has been treated almost like a rite of passage, a forgiveble stage of growing up. Those with a Nazi past, though, were hounded and deported. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Blasting the Persecution of Christopher Sandau http://www.thenownewspaper.com/news/north-delta-hockey-coach-fired-for-nazi-obsession-on-facebook-1.1496455# Tom Zytaruk The Now Newspaper. So let me get this straight. Somebody with a politically incorrect belief system who did not share it with the kids he taught or coached should be fired because a person who holds such beliefs must be regarded as a poor "role model". As one parent said, "You can't be a Nazi and coach kids' hockey". OK then. Can you be a fundamentalist Christian and coach kids' hockey? For a great many people, fundamentalist Christian beliefs are politically incorrect. Members of the Law Society in this province, for example, recently voted for a policy that would deny graduates of the Trinity College law school accreditation because of principles thought to be, well, "politically incorrect". Can you express support for the Conservative Party of Canada on your Facebook page and coach kids' hockey? After all, many supporters of the Green, Liberal and NDP parties would consider Conservative ideas, particularly social Conservative ideas "politically incorrect". But hey wait, you say. Comparing fundamentalist Christians and Conservatives to Nazis is absurd. Nazism is a totalitarian ideology associated with the commission of some of the most horrendous crimes in human history. But guess what? So is Communism. In fact the "body count" of Comrade Stalin or Mao is many times greater than Hitlers'. Funny though, many people with a Communist past in Canada, like former BQ leader Gilles Duceppe for example, were never held accountable by the media for it. In Canada, being a student Marxist has been treated almost like a rite of passage, a forgiveable stage of growing up. Those with a Nazi past, though, were hounded and deported. Throughout the sixties and seventies and eighties, Leftists and progressives decried the persecution of the "Hollywood Ten" and others, like Pete Seeger, who were blacklisted for their alleged Communist sympathies. (But according to recent revelations by Washington Post journalist and author Diana West, many of these allegations were based on fact.) More than that, at least in Canada, many self-described Communists served on city councils,unions, school boards and taught in schools. Hmm. Interesting. It is also interesting no one on the Left seems to have a problem with a guy getting fired for his far-right beliefs or sympathies or associations. That leads me to wonder. If Mr. Sandau made his Facebook page "a shrine for Communism", do you think he would have been fired? Would he have been fired if he questioned the estimated number, 8 million, of Ukrainians killed in the Holomodor, which has long been established as a Plan to wipe put the kulaks? A great many, if not most members of the Canadian Communist Party at one time publicly denied that the Ukrainian "Holocaust" happened, but no one demanded that they be fired. No one, I seem to remember, ever stated that you can't be a Communist and coach kids' hockey (or teach kids in classrooms, as many of them did). The double standards and hypocrisy over this issue astounds me. But then again, in Canada, it has become par for the course. Malcolm Ross---a published anti-semite, was fired from his teaching job in New Brunswick even though he was well regarded by students as a good Math teacher who never shared political views with them. The School Board, as I recall, made the argument that Ross, given his off-hours views, presented students with a poor role model. I don't recall the Civil Liberties Union rising to his defence. Meanwhile, in BC, the BC Civil Liberties Union defended a teacher in North Vancouver who was fired by a Catholic School Board when it was learned that he was living common law. The Board argued that he was a bad role model for Catholic students and that he had violated the values of the school. The BCCLU argued that what this teacher did in his private life was irrelevant to his competence as a teacher. I guess it all depends whose ideological ox is being gored. In the wake of this story about Mr. Sandau's firing, I am going to have to take a gravol tablet on Remembrance Day, when once again, I will undoubtedly hear someone say "They died so that we could be free". Free? Free to say only things that are deemed to fall within the pale of socially acceptable discourse? Free to repeat only approved history? Is bona fide history only to be written and interpreted by the victors, as Herman Goering cynically said? Apparently. I had two uncles who fought in the war to rid Europe of Adolph Hitler. One of them didn't come back. I don't believe that either one of them, if they could speak from the grave, who be happy with the kind of country that Canada has become, a place where more and more, people must be worried about what they say. No wonder many have come to regard Canada as a "Soft Totalitarian State". McCarthyism---from the Right or, as is now the case, from the Left, -- is totally unacceptable. No one should lose his job simply for expressing abhorrent political views. Tim Murray PS Please feel free to copy this email to the gutless wonders who serve on the North Delta Minor Hockey Association. No doubt their decision has earned plaudits in every self-righteous bastion of PC groupthink across the land.

Throughout the sixties and seventies and eighties, Leftists and progressives decried the persecution of the “Hollywood Ten” and others, like Pete Seeger, who were blacklisted for their alleged Communist sympathies. (But according to recent revelations by Washington Post journalist and author Diana West, many of these allegations were based on fact.) More than that, at least in Canada, many self-described Communists served on city councils,unions, school boards and taught in schools. Hmm. Interesting. It is also interesting no one on the Left seems to have a problem with a guy getting fired for his far-right beliefs or sympathies or associations.

That leads me to wonder. If Mr. Sandau made his Facebook page “a shrine for Communism”, do you think he would have been fired?  Would he have been fired if he questioned the estimated number, 8 million, of Ukrainians killed in the Holomodor, which has long been established as a Plan to wipe put the kulaks? A great many, if not most members of the Canadian Communist Party at one time publicly denied that the Ukrainian “Holocaust” happened, but no one demanded that they be fired. No one, I seem to remember, ever stated that you can’t be a Communist and coach kids’ hockey (or teach kids in classrooms, as many of them did).

The double standards and hypocrisy over this issue astounds me. But then again, in Canada, it has become par for the course.

Malcolm Ross—a published anti-semite,  was fired from his teaching job in New Brunswick even though he was well regarded by students as a good Math teacher who never shared political views with them. The School Board, as I recall, made the argument that Ross, given his off-hours views, presented students with a poor role model. I don’t recall the Civil Liberties Union rising to his defence. Meanwhile, in BC, the BC Civil Liberties Union defended a  teacher in North Vancouver who was fired by a Catholic School Board when it was learned that he was living common law.  The Board argued that he was a bad role model for Catholic 

Freedom of Speech in Canada? No way! Hockey Coach Fired for Pro-National Socialist Facebook Comments

Posted on by

Freedom of Speech in Canada? No way! Hockey Coach Fired for Pro-National Socialist Facebook Comments

 
Free to hold controversial views? Not in politically correct Canada!
 
Doug Christie often warned: “It doesn’t matter what is written in constitutions or Charters of Rights and Freedoms. You only have those rights you are prepared to fight for.”
 
Freedom of speech and freedom of thought are very much in peril in Canada today. Many people just don’t get it.
 
Christopher-Maximillian Sandau posted some of his historical views on his Facebook page. He expressed doubts about the 6-million claim — an article of faith more sacred in political correctness than the divinity of Christ is for Christians. He felt German World War II villainy is exaggerated.
 
The Langley, BC man’s main love in life is coaching amateur hockey. He never tried to indoctrinate the young hockey players. However, when the contents of his Facebook page became known, the local hockey league promptly dismissed him.
 
So, the man is fired for nothing more than the non-violent expression of his political/historical views on his own time. Some anonymous (of course!) parent even pontificates:  “ You can’t be a Nazi and coach kids hockey.” Well, what if you’re a communist, a homosexual activist, or a Zionist? Mr. Sandau denies being a supporter of National Socialism, but, even if her were, so what?
More than ever, CAFE and free speech supporters have our work cut out for us in convincing Canadians of the sacred importance of freedom of thought and freedom of speech.
“A minor hockey coach in British Columbia has been fired for posting pro-Nazi content on his Facebook page, conceding to one local reporter following his dismissal: ‘I get it, it’s a really touchy subject.’ Christopher Maximilian Sandau was formally relieved of his duties on Saturday, after the North Delta Minor Hockey Association discovered his online activities. He was coaching teams with players the age of middle school students.

‘Hockey has been my life,’ Sandau told The Surrey Now, a paper headquartered about an hour’s drive east of Vancouver. ‘My view on the history basically got me canned. A lot of people have no idea about the other side of the story.’

‘The posts contained extreme and objectionable material believed to be incompatible with an important purpose of our minor hockey association: ‘To promote and encourage good citizenship,’ association president Anita Cairney said in a release. ‘The (hockey association) requires that our coaches present themselves as positive role models for our children athletes.’ …

The Surrey Now quoted an unidentified parent: ‘You can’t be a Nazi and coach kids hockey.’

A Facebook page under Sandau’s name was pulled down late Wednesday afternoon. Before it disappeared, it was a curated library of sympathetic Nazi images and commentary. One of the most recent posts had been made on Tuesday, featuring a photograph of an undated Nazi rally under the caption: ‘Not too many speakers get the attendance of over a million people from far and wide…’

‘I was doing a good job and I wasn’t trying to impose my political beliefs or anything on anyone,’ Sandau told CTV. “From the time I stepped onto the parking lot of the arena to the time I left, I was all about hockey and trying to help the kids get better.”

Sandau, a 33-year-old resident of Langley, B.C., told The Surrey Now he considered himself ‘a big history buff,” and claimed of the Holocaust: ‘There is no such plan, there was no idea.’

‘These people died from typhus,’ he told the paper. ‘The Germans were actually doing their best to save these people. These people were not that evil as we’re told.'” (National Post, November 5, 2014)

 

Paul Fromm

Director

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

Christopher Sandau was removed from his role with the North Delta Minor Hockey Association over the weekend.

Screengrab/Twitter/@ChrisMaxSandauChristopher Sandau was removed from his role with the North Delta Minor Hockey Association over the weekend.

British Columbia Lawyers Just Voted to Discriminate Against Christians

Posted on by
ForCanada

 

 
British Columbia Lawyers Just Voted to Discriminate Against Christians

It should be front page news across Canada: British Columbia’s lawyers have just voted to ban any Trinity Western University law school graduate from practicing law in B.C.

Not because these students would be unqualified.

Not because they have done anything unethical.

The opposite, in fact: it’s because Trinity Western students sign a personal conduct pledge to live by Christian values — including to abstain from sex outside a traditional marriage.

Incredibly, this voluntary, personal ethics pledge is the very reason why B.C.’s lawyers are blacklisting Trinity Western students.

It’s shocking. It’s illegal — the Supreme Court of Canada already dealt with this subject, when the B.C. teachers profession tried to blacklist Trinity Western students before. The Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 in favour of the school.

The benchers of the B.C. law society — that is, the small group of lawyers elected to run the profession — had originally decided to do the right thing, and accredit the university. But a group of anti-Christian bigots forced a province-wide vote on the question. And to the profession’s everlasting shame, a majority of the lawyers who voted, voted for bigotry.

These B.C. lawyers surely know that they’re flouting the Supreme Court’s ruling. But these lawyers don’t care — their own anti-Christian bigotry trumps their belief in the rule of law.

It’s a disgrace.

There are lawyers in B.C. from a variety of religious backgrounds — Muslims, Sikhs, Jews, etc. But only lawyers who follow Christian ethics will be banned.

That’s bigotry. That’s un-Canadian. It cannot stand.

Last night I interviewed Earl Phillips, the executive director of Trinity Western’s law school. He was much more polite than me — maybe that’s his job. But I’m steaming mad.

Here’s the video of our interview. 

Please watch it, and tell me what you think.

Do you think we should fight back?

We’ve already sent a massive petition to the law society — the largest in B.C. history. But it doesn’t seem to have worked.

I think the next step is to hire a lawyer, to sue the law society, and force them to comply with our Charter of Rights.

We just can’t sit idly by while this discrimination happens right before our very eyes — by the very profession whose mission is to protect our rights.

I’m not ready to announce anything like a lawsuit yet. But I’ll keep you posted.

In the meantime, we’ve got to keep raising the alarm.

This is bigger than just Trinity Western. This is about freedom of religion for our entire country. This is about stopping the foul precedent that these law societies are setting, that anti-Christian discrimination is somehow acceptable.

Yours truly,

Ezra Levant

http://www.forcanada.ca/

29th Annual George Orwell Free Speech Dinner Honours the Late Doug Christie

Posted on by

29th Annual George Orwell Free Speech Dinner Honours the Late Doug Christie



VICTORIA, BC. October 18. The 29th annual George Orwell Free Speech dinner was held her today, drawing free speech supporters from all over British Colmbia and from as far away at Ontario and Texas. Keltie Zubko , editor of Friends of Freeom Newsletter of the Canadian Free Speech League and wife of the late free speech champion Doug Christie, is keeping this annual tradition alive. It was an emotional event and a moving and proper tribute to a man who was a giant in the free speech movement in Canada for over 30 years.

The meeting preceeding the dinner was chaired by law student Jeremy Mattock. He recalled: “I worked with Doug for three years and he inspired me to work for a better, freer, more just society.

He discussed the persecution of the planned Trinity Western University law school. “This would be a Christian university and encourage lawyers to be Christian servants of their clients. However, there have been efforts to prohibit future graduates of Trinity Western Law School from getting articling jobs (essential before being called to the bar). The philosophy of Trinity Western is to ask students and faculty to refrain from excessive use of alcohol and drugs and to maintain traditional Christian standards of sexual morality,” he explained. “Yet, many lawyers want to prohibit such people who voluntarily agree to such restrictions from even practising law.”

He warned: “There are increasing and dangerous restrictions on who can and cannot speak out. Evangelist and author Bill Whatcott was fined $17,000 by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission for expressing the traditional Christian view on homosexuality.”

“How long will it be,” he asked, “before expressing the traditional Christian view on marriage could land you in jail or be excluded from polite society?”

And, he warned, “web publisher Arthur Topham (radicalpress.com) may face jail time for making available on the Internet what’s available in some bookstores and libraries, books like The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and Germany Must Perish. But the government does not go after bookstores or libraries. It goes after the little guy, like Arthur Topham.”


Victoria lawyer Barclay Johnson who wound down much of Mr. Christie’s law practice and represented CAFE in its appeal to Federal Court in the Marc Lemire Sec. 13 case, joked about wearing an Hawaiian happy shirt. He said that crime rates in Canada are falling but police forces keep growing. “Between 2001 and 2012, policing costs rose 8.7% but crime fell 26.7% and police work load decreased,” To justify their expansion and the huge bite they take out of local budgets, police are increasingly in the revenue collecting business. Police salaries are huge. “The average salary for a policeman in Victorias is $96,000 per year,” he said.

“We have way too many police officers. So, they come up with these strategies so that no one will complain about their high salaries. “They are writing tickets like crazy.” He cited a weekend blitz exposed last summer in the Vancouver Province. The RCMP were out in force in the sparsely travelled stretch of Highway 3, between Hope and Princeton. Over 100 cars were seized under civil forfeiture on the spot. One family who had their car seized were in a remote area out of cellphone range. They had to flag passersby just to return to a large town.” That’s also bear country. The police just left them. In that case, Judge Bowden ruled that yiou cabn’t be subject to civil forfeiture for speeding.

Civil forfeiture is a major abuse and both Doug Christie and Barclay Johnson were among the first to expose it more than two years ago. “Why is the government getting into selling used cars? It’s all about money. The municipalities’ biggest expense is policing,” he noted.


]]]]
Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, gave the keynote presentation about the present state of free speech in Canada. “Sometime next year,” he said, “the B’nai Brith and Richard Warman Sec. 319 ‘hate law’ charges against Arthur Topham will go to trial in Quesnel. Topham is a fearless terrier and will not give up.” CAFÉ has been helping him financially and will continue to help him in this evil case, where he is being prosecuted for material posted on his website radicalpress.com, includingThe Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Germany Must Perish (a hateful book providing a blueprint for genocide of the German people) and Israel Must Perish, a clever Topham spoof of the previous book. For the prune-faced, humourless politically correct, it was a SATIRE, meant to expose and criticize Germany Must Perish,” Mr. Fromm chided.














“This is a crucial case,” Mr. Fromm warned. “We hope to discredit the ‘hate law’ and challenge its application to the Internet. Interestingly, the first two impugned books are freely available at libraries and at some bookstores. Once again, the law is being used to silence the independent, the little guy.”

Good news: The Ontario Civil Liberties Association has entered the fray on Arthur’s behalf and is circulating an on-line petition urging British Columbia Attorney General Suzanne Anton to withdraw her consent to this “hate law” prosecution.

” In New Brunswick, we will soon go to the New Brunswick Court of Appeal in the matter of the McCorkill will,” he said. Robert McCorkill, a retired chemistry professor willed the U.S.-based National Alliance his collection of rare coins and artefacts, valued at upwards of $250,000. The free speech hating Southern Poverty Law Centre in Montgomery, Alabama objected about this support for “White supremacists.” Ottawa lawyer and frequent human rights complainant Richard Warman alleged the bequest was contrary to “public policy.”

“The next thing we knew,” Mr. Fromm recalled, “Isabelle McCorkell (yes, different spelling), the professor’s long estranged sister, who had made no legal moves since his death in 2004, surfaced and challenged the will seeking to have it overturned as ‘contrary to public policy.’ Umm, was someone whispering in her ear? Almost immediately, the New Brunswick Attorney General, the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith sought and obtained intervener status. CAFÉ intervened on behalf of the estate.”

“In June, we were stunned by the decision of Mr. Justice Grant to invalidate the bequest,” Mr. Fromm reported. The reason: the bequest was contrary to public policy; that is, the NA’s views were politically incorrect. For good measure, without even a charge or trial, much less evidence or a defence, the judge found that the National Alliance was guilty of violating Canada’s ‘hate laws.’ This decision puts the boots to property rights and freedom of belief and MUST be appealed. We must win this case or the right to bequeath your property to whom you will may have to pass the litmus test of political correctness,” he warned.

“There is a visceral hatred for Christians on the part of most of the political and legal establishment in this country,” Mr. Fromm argueed. He pointed to last year’s decision in the Whatcott case where the “cultural Marxists on the Supreme Court of Canada” basically ruled against public expressions of traditional teaching on homosexuality. Homosexuals are now a designated “vulnerable minority” although the militant homosexual lobby has won almost every battle it has fought. “The Supremos ruled that not scientific truth, not sincerely held religious belief, not political discourse nor hoest opinion were defences against the accusation of exposing a privileged minority to contempt. Quite simply they hate Christians,” Mr. Fromm warned a subdued audience.

And, the appalling harassment of Christian crusader Bill Whatcott continues. Mr. Fromm recounted Mr. Whatcott’s latest run is with cowardice and censorship. “He sought to organize a meeting on Christian morality in the modern world. He had a lawyer vet a proposed ad in the Regina Leader-Post. The Leader-Post refused to run this tasteful and non-inflammatory ad. Thus, it would be hard to advertise his meeting. Mr. Whatcott then ran off and distributed 5,000 leaflets advertising the meeting to be held in Lee’s Funeral Home. The press contacted the home and asked whether they were comfortable with protests. The management, who agreed with Whatcott’s conservative Christian morality, promptly collapsed and cancelled the meeting, much to the delight of the Leader-Post. The Delta Regina, on seeing the publicity, reneged on its booking. Mr. Whatcott then lined up St. Athanasius Ukrainian Catholic Church. It too wimped out fearing negative publicity. Thus, a conservative Christian cannot find a venue and cannot publicly advertise a meeting to discuss morality vis a vis homosexuality and abortion.”

“Many Canadians have only the vaguest commitment to free speech. Businesses often are utter cowards and censors. We have a lot of work to do, not just in protesting to those businesses that trampled on Mr. Whatcott’s rights but in trying to turn more Canadians on to freedom. Doug Christie always said: ‘It doesn’t matter what is in constitutions or Charters of Rights and Freedoms; you only have the rights you are prepared to FIGHT for,’ he concluded.

IHR Meeting Discusses Censorship in Budapest

Posted on by

 

IHR Meeting Discusses Censorship in Budapest

Vienna, Virginia. October 11, 2014. Three participants in last weekend’s much harassed Future of Europe Conference in Budapest delivered their accounts and explanations to a meeting of the Institute for Historical Review (IHR).

Author F. Roger Devlin and Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, explained the sequence of events. About two weeks before the conference, socialists and the former communist party in Hungary spread wild alarm about the meeting of “White supremacists”.| A media frenzy followed.

The rightist government of Viktor Orban, facing municipal elections, caved in and ordered its interior minister to take all legal measures to shut down the conference. The convention centre where the meeting was to be held cancelled its contract. The hotel where people who registered through NPI were to stay cancelled reservations.

Although Hungarian nationalist party Jobbik had been a key planner of the event, they quickly folded, announcing that they had not known that the National Policy Institute (NPI), the organizers were “White supremacists,” an allegation which is false. Another organizing sponsor Arktos Books also folded.

Key participants, including Alexander Dugin, a former advisor to Vladimir Putin, were denied visas. On the Monday before the conference, NPI founder Bill Regnery, arriving in Budapest from London, was arrested, deported and slapped with a three year ban from the Schengen countries.

On the night before the conference was to occur, about 50 participants were in a Budapest pub. Riot police burst in and checked everyone’s ID. Some were searched. About 30 were detained and taken to their hotels for further investigation. Richard Spencer, the NPI organizer was taken off to jail, held until Monday and then deported. He, too, has been slapped with an arbitrary three year ban from the Schengen countries — all the EU, except England and Croatia.

Nevertheless, an intrepid Jared Taylor and a Hungarian contact salvaged the conference. A restaurant was arranged or Saturday night. About 100 attendees gathered clandestinely and heard short after dinner talks by Mr. Taylor and Professor Tom Sunic.

Frederick Fromm

Well, concluded Paul Fromm, ” we came to Budapest to discuss ‘the future of Europe’ and we saw first hand that the future will have to be fought for. It is a life and death struggle between the Cultural Marxists who are engineering the genocidal replacement of Europeans by the Third World and nationalists or Identitarians who wish to preserve the national characteristics of their lands and who want to keep Europe European. The methods of the Cultural Marxists involve repression,” he concluded.

IHR Director Mark Weber had also been in Budapest and offered a broader explanation of what had happened. “Before an earthquake takes place,” he said, “there are powerful movements of forces within the earth. Last May’s political earthquake was the election to the European Parliament of a large number of nationalists and Euroskeptics like Marine LePen’s National Front, UKIP in Britain and Jobbik in Hungary, This caused an unprecedented level of anxiety in the U.S. and European political establishments.”

The election results showed the bankruptcy of both conservative and socialist parties. They ignore chronic youth unemployment and seem helpless before the greed of multinationals. “People sense something is wrong,” Mr. Weber said. “Europeans are dying out and, with each passing year, America is becoming more and more unrecognizable — a Third World country,” he added.

Germany is Abolishing Itself, a recent book by a long-time member of Germany’s socialist party and former Governor of the Bundesbank, Thilo Sarrazin sold more than 1.5-million copies and set off shockwaves. “This reasoned and logical book and its author were furiously denounced by the media and the political establishment. Sarrazin stresses deep rooted social, economic and genetic problems,” Mr. Weber explained. Germany is threatened by a low birthrate. The Golden Age of German’s post war economy is ending. The income of the average worker has not increased in 20 years.

.

Frederick Fromm

For the post war years, each generation is one third smaller than the previous one but people are living longer. ‘Germans,” said Mr. Weber, “live self-centred lives. There is a dull fatalistic sense of a future where Germany will decline as will the population’s intelligence and skill. Intelligence is 80 per cent determined by genetics. We know that the average intelligence level in the West has been declining. And the average immigrant to Europe is less intelligent than the average German.”

However, the U.S. works to break down active ethnic solidarity world wide. “The Americanization of Europe means the ethnic extinction of Europe,” Mr. Weber warned. “Without Europeans, Europe is just a geographic designation. There can be no real Europe without Europeans. The central fact of American history is that it was founded and developed by Europeans,” he explained. “If it had been founded by Africans, it would be like Haiti’. You cannot a society like Denmark with a population of Mexicans.”

“The breakdown of the West,” he stressed, “is the result of radical egalitarianism and individualism. A 100 years ago, the whole world, with the exception of Japan and Ethiopia was dominated by Europeans. Today, Europe cannot or will not even protect its heartland.’

“The end of World War II was a catastrophe for the West. French author Celine saw the Axis forces as the bulwark of Europe against the egalitarianism of Soviet Communism,: Mr. Weber said.

“A nation that embraces an ideology not rooted in reality will not survive nor does it deserve to,” he concluded.