Author Archives: admin

The Jasper Busking Story — Monika Schaefer

Posted on by

The Jasper Busking Story — Monika Schaefer

Free Speech Monika

~ Exercising My Human Right to Speak Freely!

Free Speech Monika

The Jasper Busking Story

24MondayJul 2017

Posted by  in busking, Canada, Fitzhugh newspaper, Free Speech, Jasper, Prof. Tony Hall, The Jasper Local newspaper, Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

The following story is an abridged open letter which I sent to the Mayor and Council of Jasper on July 8, 2017. Their email addresses are at the bottom, if you care to write to them. There is much irony in this story, especially in light of the fact that the award pictured here was given to me by the very organization which denied me a busking permit.

Raven-about-the-Arts Award

A Chronology of Promises & Broken Promises, Steps & Missteps

This story begins about 5 years ago. I made a presentation to Town Council that busking should be allowed in Jasper. It was not legal to busk at the time. I made the case that this little mountain town within a national park and world heritage site was a perfect place for busking, and that it would be a win-win-win situation. It would be good for the musicians, good for the tourists, and good for the town aesthetic. My presentation was well received, and the councillors enthusiastically assured me they would work on making it happen.

It took some time, but finally in 2016, the busking program was launched. To be specific it was Busking Pilot Project #2. Pilot Project #1 occurred during the Arts Days weekend late September 2015, and I took part in that. My band, the “Fiddle River Band”, played on the Saturday afternoon, and it was a great success. People were dancing on the sidewalk.

The 2016 Pilot Project was the first time that busking licences would be sold, and musicians could busk all summer, with a few guidelines stipulating where, when and how long.

Imagine my surprise then when I went to buy my licence, and was sent the curt email,

in light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time.

There it was, clearly stated, that it was because of my thoughts that I was not going to be allowed to play my violin on the streets of Jasper.

https://freespeechmonika.wordpress.com/2016/08/07/busking-permit-denied/

That was last year. What came next? A season of surveys, meetings, emails, new process, newspaper articles, auditions, vetting buskers, guidelines, and rules.

Winter of 2016 – 2017

In response to numerous queries last summer by both myself and Prof Tony Hall from the University of Lethbridge, the town manager responded that there would be a survey in the fall to determine the success and what problems, if any, arose from the busking project, and then they would be in a position to answer our questions.

Autumn came and went, and there was not much action. There was a general satisfaction survey which included two questions on busking, and another survey for the business community more specifically related to busking.

On February 14th, 2017, busking was on the agenda of the Committee-of-the-Whole Council meeting. I requested a spot on the agenda. Marianne Garrah and Dave Baker of the Habitat for the Arts were also in attendance and made a presentation before mine.

https://freespeechmonika.wordpress.com/2017/02/18/addressing-town-council-on-busking-and-thought-policing/

I took note of Marianne Garrah’s comment that the vetting process for buskers should be based on talent and musical ability. This was noted in the minutes. To my understanding, that statement by Garrah was a tacit admission that they had erred the previous summer when they denied me a busking license based on my thoughts. This gave me confidence that this summer would be different.

At the same time, Councillor Gilbert Wall declared openly that I should not be allowed on the streets to busk, and that he could not separate my violin playing from my ideas. It was written about in both newspapers, as being “the elephant in the room” and “given what we know…” – how ominous – Councillor Wall made it clear that there must be “an out”, for them to be able to shut me out.

http://www.fitzhugh.ca/new-busking-rules-on-the-horizon/

Powered by

Publish for Free

April 11 2017 Committee of the Whole minutes state that the management of the Busking Pilot Project for 2017 would once again be handed over to the Habitat for the Arts. They also stated that the selection committee should be comprised of people who are qualified to assess musical abilities.

During subsequent meetings, a clear outline of process was made for the busker vetting and selection process. There would be a panel of 5 judges. A point system would be used. Habitat for the Arts would choose a song from the auditionee’s set lists. If the performer “seems shaky on one song you may ask them to perform another song”. The performance would be recorded and sent to other judges who presumably could not all come together at the same time because of busy schedules.

This process implies open visibility of the panel. Several of the guidelines make it clear that this was to be a live audition process. For example, one guideline states

Judges are encouraged to interact with performers (but not for too long, just enough to make them feel comfortable).” Another states: “If a performer doesn’t show up, move on to the next performer on the list.”

After the May 2nd meeting, I immediately struck up a correspondence with the Habitat people to indicate my interest in auditioning for the purpose of acquiring a busking licence. I went in person, and I emailed.

When will the auditions take place?
Where should I show up?
How will I find out when they take place?
Will there be an announcement in the paper?
Will they email me? Phone me?

Responses to my attempts at communication were either absent or slow.

Finally I was told that I could simply send them a clip electronically. Pardon me???

What happened to the whole “select a song and if they are shaky pick another one, and please interact but not too much….” scenario? What was going to be a live audition in front of a panel of judges turned into an anonymous “send in your tape”.

I asked Marianne Garrah in person, “This process is open and transparent, correct? The judges’ identities should be public, yes?” She agreed. I asked who the judges are. She started to name them and after naming two, she hesitated, reconsidered, and said,

uhhhhh, I can’t remember who the others are, it’s not really my thing. This is not my project…

….Really??????

End of May, still no buskers on the streets of Jasper.

June – I left town for about two weeks, and when I returned, there were indeed buskers on the street, but only just.

Buskstop permits

I tried to visit the Habitat several times, to no avail, as nobody was there. I emailed, and asked when I could please pick up my permit, assuming of course that there would be no problem passing the audition process, having sent them the link to my music samples. They all had assured me that they knew I could play. And they did say it was based on talent and musical ability.

Imagine once again my surprise when I received the following unsigned email.

2017-06-20
Hello Monika

For 2017 the Jasper Busking program has been designed such that a ‘no meet’ e-committee of community minded individuals are given sound/youtube/audition files provided by the artists.  Those files are listened to with the intent of realizing three things:  skill of the artist (5potential criteria points), potential enjoyment by the listener (5potential criteria points), and to gain a preception [sic] of the artists stage presence (5potential criteria points).  Those criteria points are calculated over the 5 community members and to be warranted a licence the total must equal at least 55 (or 11 out of 15 from each response).

Unfortunately the results that came back to Habitat from the committee did not reflect that total for you.  Your application for 2017 has been declined.

Habitat for the Arts
for the Jasper Municipal 2017 Busking Pilot Project

Hab@iotad.ca

Who are these faceless nameless “community minded individuals”? They made rules and guidelines, then broke them all. Live audition process turned into electronic transmission to who knows who, and whoever they are, they reached their objective to keep Monika out. No accountability. No transparency. No legitimate reason was given. They got their way and evaded responsibility. Anonymous judges, faceless nameless individuals, awarding insufficient (zero?) points to one of the best-known musicians in this little town, is rather Kafkaesque, is it not?

The Farce

What did all of this amount to? New process after endless deliberations and meetings, it was all a big facade and nothing more. They did not quite know what to do with Monika Schaefer. They knew they could not openly deny me a license based on lack of musical abilities. They stated it many times, that it was not my music that bothered them, rather, it was my thoughts. My musical background and involvement in this community is extensive and well-known. In fact, some would say I had acquired local celebrity status as a violinist and fiddler, who was in much demand at community functions and fundraisers, both as performer and occasionally also as judge during competitions.

They must have struggled with this problem, because in spite of declaring at the May 2nd council meeting that they would like to see buskers on the streets of Jasper by the May long weekend, they did not appear until some time during the second week of June. I happened to be out of town then – how convenient.

False Diversity Project

Jasper advertises its Diversity Project while advancing ideological exclusiveness.

The Fitzhugh newspaper reported (March 16, 2017 article page 3 and editorial page 6) that I was the subject of debate in deliberations about a proclamation designating Jasper an “inclusive community”. The Mayor warned that the proclamation could have unforeseen consequences.

It seems to me that inevitably we will run into the elephant in the room that councillor Gilbert Wall spoke about a week ago, that is when you proclaim to be inclusive without limitation then you are forced to confront those with whom you might have the most profound disagreements. ~Mayor Richard Ireland

All the while there is the absolute assumption that I am guilty of a crime – a thought crime. Regardless of whether I am right or wrong – should that even be relevant for the acquisition of a busking licence? Did we once pride ourselves on having freedom of speech in Canada?

Various agencies in the town of Jasper have designated themselves judge, jury and enforcers against the alleged thought crimes of Monika Schaefer. All the while, there is never so much as a glimmer of introspection, not the slightest interest in making enquiries into the issues which I have raised. In fact, the opposite is true. The ferocious attack against me is designed to frighten anyone else from looking.

There is simply a blanket acceptance of the prevailing dogma, and anyone who dares question is guilty of “racial incitement”. The very act of questioning is criminalized. The nasty little label “hate speech” is applied, and that’s that. Evidence is not required when something is “self-evident”. The Doctrine of Judicial Notice allows courts to recognize as “fact” matters that are “common knowledge”. The victors write the history books, so when they say it is so, then it is so. They determine what becomes “common knowledge”.

Inclusive community is a fraudulent concept in Jasper. Diversity in Jasper does not include thoughts.

Dear Mayor and Councillors, is this what you call due process? Is this not an EXACT fulfillment of some of my concerns expressed earlier in the winter? I thought we had reached an understanding that playing music should have NOTHING to do with a person’s views. Are you going to stand by and support the Habitat in their fraudulent project? Is this your legacy, turning the righteous town of Jasper, all-inclusive Jasper, into a narrow thought-policing agency?

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the UN Declaration of Human Rights are not being respected here in this little town in the midst of a National Park and a World Heritage Site.

The Jasper Diversity Project is a sham. The Jasper busking program is a farce. The proclamation of Inclusive Community is a joke. And most especially, the Habitat for the Arts Values and Principles Statement, all about “learning never stops…, embrace new challenges and ideas…, grow through knowledge exchange and support…” earns all three descriptors: sham, farce and a joke.

Sincerely,
Monika Schaefer

sent to Mayor and Council:

rireland@town.jasper.ab.ca
rdamota@town.jasper.ab.ca
gwall@town.jasper.ab.ca
hkempey@town.jasper.ab.ca
dwacko@town.jasper.ab.ca
bnesbitt@town.jasper.ab.ca

as well as to the Habitat for the Arts:

hab@iotad.ca

please copy to:

Dave Baker: betabake@gmail.com
Mark Fercho: mfercho@town.jasper.ab.ca
Bob Covey: bob@thejasperlocal.ca
Paul Clarke: editor@fitzhugh.ca
Monika Schaefer: monika_schaefer@hotmail.com

A homage to Ernst Zündel

Posted on by

A homage to Ernst Zündel

Robert FAURISSON                                                                                          

     July 5, 2017

 

As the reader will have heard, in France, the person in charge of “Bocage” has taken a final bow with the 6,000th newsletter under that name. Thus ends an endeavour remarkable for its range and for the mass of work devoted, since 1979, to informing us on developments in historical revisionism.

 

This newsletter no. 6,000 salutes a prestigious hero of revisionism, Ernst Zündel, born in Germany in 1939. Those who, given their relatively young age, do not know just who this amazing figure is can ask us for a brief biography.

 

 

  1. Zündel has shown such energy, such inventiveness and such disinterestedness that one may rightly assert that, without him, revisionism would never have been able toamass so many victories, victories that have resounded throughout the world.

 

When finally the collapse of the “Jewish Holocaust” myth comes about, the tribunal of History will have to render justice to a sizeable number of revisionists and, to begin with,the Frenchman Paul Rassinier and the German Ernst Zündel, who never met but who, united in heart and spirit in one and the same truly heroic venture, haveindeed fought not only for the honour of their respective homelands but also for the honour of Europe as a whole.

 

***

 

 

Bocage, July 1, 2017

 

Our final message will be a tribute to Ernst Zündel, the German-Canadian revisionist to whom revisionism owes so much!

 

For revisionists, Ernst Zündel has played an unparalleled role: with his leaflets, his periodicals – always punctual – in English and German, his help in disseminating so many books in various languages, his radio and television broadcasts, his videos, he has been everywhere, and always present to inspire the movement. In 1990, thanks to a formidable undertaking organised as he knows how, our cause achieved a particularly fine victory: the elimination from the plaques at Auschwitz of the figure of four million dead,replaced later by that of a million and a half.

 

And it is above all he who, in the manner of anorchestral conductor, masterfully coordinated his two trials in Toronto (1985 and 1988), bringing revisionists and opponents of revisionism from all over the world there,especially in the 1985 trial, in order finally to organise a courtroom confrontation between the two camps (needless to say, when subjected to the inflexible cross-examination of barrister Douglas Christie, advised by Professor Faurisson, the opponents bit the dust so hard that a man like, for instance, Raul Hilberg, the “Pope of exterminationism”, would refuse to return for the 1988 trial!). We think anyone wishing to be informed about revisionism should begin by reading Michael Hoffman’sThe Great Holocaust Trial, published by Independent History & Research

(https://revisionisthistorystore.blogspot.it/2010/03/michael-hoffmans-online-revisionist.html).

 

Therefore an end had to be put to Ernst Zündel’sexuberant and iconoclastic activity and it was on February 5, 2003 that this “hero” (the word is Professor Faurisson’s) was literally abducted at his Tennessee home; from that date, i.e. for the past 14 years, this manwas to find himself gagged, completelyunable to express himself on the subject thatwas his life’s work: to cleanse Germany, his country of origin, of the false accusations by which she is overwhelmed. After 7 years in prison, amongst which 2 in Canada in conditions close to torture and the rest in Germany, he would have to pass a probationperiod of 3 years, but the 10 years of silence were not to stop there: in order to maximise his chances of obtaining the right to return to his house in Tennessee, he would carry onmaintaining anear-complete silence for 4 years… and our readers will indeed have noted that at our end wedidour best to respect that silence.

 

Alas, on March 31of this year the dreaded final decision was issued: while the door stays open to so many migrants, the United States, through the voice of a certain Ron Rosenberg, chief of the Administrative Appeals Officeof the US Citizen and Immigration Services, which acts by delegation of theDepartment of Homeland Security, refusedthe eminent revisionist entry to its territory for all time, thus forbidding him foreverfrom returning to his own home there,beside his wife! However, the law is clear: a person convicted abroad who seeks entry to the United States is to be barred only if the conducthaving led to conviction is “deemed criminal by United States standards”; but “denying the Holocaust and expressing anti-Semitic sentiments [which in fact E. Zündelhas never done – Bocage] is just not a crime underAmerican law”, noted UCLA law professor Eugene Volokhin a Washington Post column published, cynically, on April 24, Ernst Zündel’s birthday!

 

It was only onMay 9 that we received a copy of thatiniquitousruling signed “Rosenberg”:readers who wishto have their own copy mayrequest itfrom us.

 

On May 17 we asked E. Zündel for his reaction, and he replied as follows:

 

Hi! I have read and reread that US ruling by Ron Rosenberg and am ever more disgusted.
I am so disgusted by this hypocritical charade that I find it nearly impossible to force myself to write something about it!

 

So here goes:

 

I had engaged a top immigration lawyer with over thirty years of practicalexperience with immigration law in the USA. This lawyer handled my casefrom the beginning!

 

I followed all his advice and US rules and regulations to the letter.

 

All things progressed well, I already lived with my wife in the USA at our own property, running our publishing business; I had been granted a work permit, a social security number, had a comprehensive health check-up, including x-rays, aids test,in short, I was fingerprinted by the FBI, even interrogated by a special agent of theFBI, passing all tests required, with flying colours. There was only one more visit to be undertaken with an immigration official beforeI would be granted permanent residence and could live and work in the USAfor the rest of my life!

 

We were able to obtain my FBI file after my arrest and deportation!The special agent of the FBI, called Scott Nowinski, recommended to his headquartersthat they close the Zündel file, assuming that I would be given residency status!

 

Ingrid and I carried on with our lives, being reassured by the attorneys that all
was only a matter of time and routine!

 

We were totally taken by surprise, when out of the clear blue sky I wasarrestedduring a workday without warning, while framing paintings for my soon to be opened art gallery! The US officials did not allow me to call my attorney, and they did not have an Arrest Warrant!

 

Instead they claimed that I had overstayed my visa, an obvious and blatant concocted lie, their cover story! In order to deport me from the USA.

 

Due to this deportation, which came after the events of 9/11 (the attacks onthe World Trade Center and the Pentagon),I was imprisoned in Canada, todetermine my status for two years! Then I was declared a security threat to the nation of Canada, where I had lived peacefully and productively for 42 years, and was declared persona non grata by Canada.

 

I was deported to Germany, arrested on the steps of the plane which had flown meacross the ocean in handcuffs from Canada and immediately imprisoned in Mannheim!

 

There I was tried in Court for my writings and broadcasts done in the USA, whichwere perfectly legal in America.

 

After a lengthy and grotesque trial in Mannheim I was convicted and sentenced to the maximum term of five years under Germany’s controversial holocaust-related post war laws!

 

I lost all appeals, served every minute of the five-year sentence, plus another three years of “probation”, and was finally released on March 1, 2010!

 

We, my wife Ingrid and I, fought in the US courts for 14 years, trying to return to the USA. Virtually always lost, also lost all appeals.We spent untoldsums on legal fees and court proceedings!

 

The end result is the ruling by Homeland Security, signed by one Ron Rosenberg, which follows! There is also a critical review of this decision, by a US law professor from Los Angeles University by the name of Volkovh (?),whichclarifies matters somewhat!

 

The Zündel case reveals a great deal about the state of justice and human rights in America today!

 

There is a vast gap in the USA between their “reality” and American propaganda!

 

* * *

Ernst Zündel continues to describe himself as unvanquished and defiant,and he will not bend!

____________________

Colour photo above: Ernst Zündel, in Toronto in the 1980s, displaying before Robert Faurisson, Fred Leuchter, Robert Miller and DitliebFelderer the building plans of the five Auschwitz and Birkenau crematoria, discovered by R. Faurisson in Poland on March 19, 1976. Those plans, kept hidden until then, enabledthe creation of scalemodels making it obvious thatthe alleged gigantic homicidal gassingoperations were physically impossible. See, in this regard, 1) An Engineering Report on the Alleged Execution Gas Chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek (Poland) prepared by Fred A. Leuchter on April 5, 1988, 193 p.; 2) Did Six Million Really Die? Report of the Evidence in the Canadian “False News” Trial of Ernst Zündel– 1988, edited by Barbara Kulaszka, 1992, viii-564 p.

Posted on by

CAFE PROTEST PEEL BOARD’S PROPOSAL TO GAG CITIZEN DELEGATIONS

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 905-566-4455; FAX: 905-566-4820

Website: http://cafe.nfshost.com

Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director

July 25, 2017

The Editor,

THE MISSISSAUGA NEWS

RE: “Bylaw addition would give chairman more power over delegates”  (Mississauga News, July 20, 2017)

Dear Sir:

I fear that, like the ancien regime, the Peel District School has grown out of touch and arrogant.

Recently, they arbitrarily cut off delegations wishing to discuss special treatment of Muslim students.

Now, a new bylaw proposal seems even more ham-handed in stifling opinions they don’t like. It says, in part: “Delegations who use offensive language, make any disorderly noise or disturbance … or behave in a manner that is not consistent with … the Ontario Human Rights Code, may by ordered to discontinue the presence and/or leave the board room … or premises.”

In other words, parents and taxpayers, shut up but don’t forget to send in your August property tax installment that pays for the Board, and make sure it reaches us on time.

“Offensive language” is utterly subjective and, in an increasingly diverse and divided society, someone is likely to take offence at almost any remark.

Even more preposterous is the decision to turf people whose comments, presumably, are not consistent with the Ontario Human Rights Code. And the Board chairman is to make a snap decision to cut off a speaker? Nothing is contrary to the OHRC until a complaint has been launched, a hearing held where evidence pro and con and submissions pro and con are made and a finding of forbidden discrimination made.

Chairman Barbara McDougald, ironically, in your report clarifies the sinister censorship aims of this proposed bylaw. “An example of a delegate who could be asked to leave the property would be in individual who publicly describes another person in a ‘hateful way'”. Really? “Hateful” is entirely in the eyes of the beholder. Our community encompasses strong and antagonistic views which will clash.

We’re the taxpayers. It’s the Board who spends our money hugely who should shut up and listen to the taxpayers. And, no we shouldn’t have to doff our caps and bleat, “May I?”

Paul Fromm

Port Credit

Director

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

Board bylaw addition would give chair power to kick delegates off property

Recommendation prompted by past disruptions over Muslim prayer issue

NEWS Jun 07, 2017 by Jason Spencer  Mississauga News

SHARE

A recommended addition to Peel District School Board by-laws around delegations would give the chair the power to have a delegate removed from the building if their public address contravenes the Ontario Human Rights Code. – Metroland file photo

A recommended addition to Peel District School Board bylaws tighten control over delegations.

The current board bylaw about delegations indicates, for example, that anyone who comments on the character of an identifiable individual such as a trustee during their delegation could be asked by the chair to stop and/or leave the room.

However, the hornet’s nest that was the Muslim prayer issue in the Peel board this school year has prompted an addition to section G-3 that looks to crack down on delegates who veer into offensive territory.

The suggested addition, which trustees vote on June 19, reads: “Delegations who use offensive language, make any disorderly noise or disturbance, resist the rules of the board, disobey the decision of the chair or of the board, or behave in a manner that is not consistent with board policies and the Ontario Human Rights Code, may be ordered by the chair to discontinue the presentation and/or leave the board room or meeting room or premises.”

If passed, it appears chair Janet McDougald, who does not have a legal background, would then be permitted to determine if a delegate contravenes the OHRC in their delegation — and, if she thinks so, that individual could be removed from the property.

Asked if she is in a position to make that determination, she replied, “I think the chair, as long as they understand what the human rights code says, then they’re capable of interpreting it.”

McDougald told The News she does not have a fulsome understanding of the OHRC, but, if the bylaw addition passes, she would familiarize herself accordingly.

“I won’t know the entire code, but I will certainly understand the parts of the code that would relate to this particular activity of delegations,” she said.

Any issue interpreting legislation, she said, the chair would likely seek legal counsel.

McDougald does not think that having the power to throw a delegate out of the building is overstepping any bounds.

An example of a delegate who could be asked to leave the property would be an individual who publicly describes another person in a “hateful way,” regarding their culture, race or background, she said, adding that delegates should disagree respectfully.

A change to a board operating procedure around how religious accommodation for Muslim students is handled came into effect last September. That change, which involved students no longer being able to write their own Friday prayer sermons, stirred up the Muslim community.

The board reversed its decision in January, which then drew the ire of those opposed to the Muslim faith, or any religion in public schools.

The intensity rang out over the next four months, as board meetings were packed with critics who wanted Muslim prayer out of Peel board schools.

The board continually reiterated that they were required under the OHRC to provide religious accommodations to the point of undue hardship.

Disruptions eventually tapered off in April when new security measures required attendees to provide photo identification before entering a meeting.

Board bylaws and policies are examined annually by the trustee review committee.

Another recommended bylaw change involves the chair being able to determine the length of the public question period at meetings.

Kevin J. Johnston Arrested For M-103 Speech

Posted on by

Kevin J. Johnston Arrested For M-103 Speech

By

 Kevin J. Johnston

Kevin J. Johnston and M103 with Iqra Khalid and Omar Alghabra with Bonnie Crombie

M-103 – Kevin J. Johnston Arrested in Mississauga under M-103

Here is what I can say:

+ I was arrested today at my home.
+ The charge is WILFUL PROMOTION OF HATRED 319 (2) C.C.
+ I was released today prior to 4PM
+ Toronto Star, CP-24 and Global News were outside the courthouse and they got to film me tying my shoes. I jumped into a cab and didn’t answer their questions.

+ The Peel Regional Police were Polite, Professional and very quickly got me in and out of the court house without incident.

+ The PEEL POLICE did NOT assault me in any way. DO NOT believe the media. The Police acted perfectly and I could not be any happier with my treatment.

+ I can talk about almost none of the case, so above will have to do until I can sit in with my lawyer.
IN CASE YOUTUBE KILLS US, FOLLOW ON BITCHUTE: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/kevinjjohnston

DONATE TODAY at FreedomReport.ca

Kevin J. Johnston

Her Enemies Failed to Stop Memorial for Barbara Kulazska: Free Speech 1; Censors 0!

Posted on by

Her Enemies Failed to Stop Memorial for Barbara Kulazska: Free Speech 1; Censors 0!

On June 15, we lost lawyer Barbara Kulazska to lung cancer at age 64. [An obituary will appear in THE FREE SPEECH MONITOR next month.] Barbara was one of the most important free speech lawyers of her generation. She worked closely with Douglas Christie in Zundel 11, in the Zundelsite case and did fantastic work with Marc Lemire in fighting Richard Warman and getting Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (Internet censorship) declared unconstitutional.

 

However, the dark forces of thought control and censorship could not leave this formidable woman alone in death. The Canadian Association for Free Expression organized a private memorial on July 12 at the Richview Branch of the Toronto Public Library. Word leaked out on July 10. The enemies of free speech — Warren Kinsella, a major antagonist in the YOUR WARD NEWS mailing rights appeal,  Richard Warman (many of whose libel case victims she had defended), the usual Jewish pro-censorship groups, Bernie Farber , assorted street thugs and even John Tory, Mayor of Toronto, demanded that the memorial be cancelled. The library hung tough and laid on extra security. A senior manager sat in to make sure there was no “hate speech” (What a pathetic nation we’ve become!) Metro Police sent three masked Antifa street urchins, one allegedly a masked female, packing. The emotional farewell proceeded quietly and respectfully.

 Image result for barbara kulazska memorial

The voices raised to cancel the meeting were marked by their  vehemence and rage. “Warren Kinsella, a Toronto-based political consultant and commentator who is a staunch opponent of Fromm’s, disagreed.  ‘Public services are not supposed to be used to promote discrimination. The library in Etobicoke is doing that.'” (CBC News, July 12, 2017) How is honouring a dead lady “discrimination”? You’d suspect such lack of logic more from the Antifa street losers who’d sucked too long on their crack pipes. “‘It is truly shocking that individuals who spread hatred, deny the Holocaust and have ties to neo-Nazi groups are being provided a permit by the Toronto Public Library to host an event inside a public building,’ [Councillor James] Pasternak said. “Those tied to hate and bigotry have no place in our libraries.” Pasternak, who likely did not hail from County Tipperary, clearly supports political discrimination.

 

And then, of course, Bernie Farber, for years an executive with the Canadian Jewish Congress and now a CEO with  multiculti Mosaic, who also seeks to have YOUR WARD NEWS shut down added his two shekels worth: ” “In my view, Barbara Kulaszka was, like her late predecessor and colleague Doug Christie, a fellow traveller of those neo-Nazis, Holocaust deniers and hatemongers for whom she acted as legal counsel,” Bernie Farber added. When the censorship efforts failed,  long time leftist Farber was still given a column in the “right-wing“ Toronto Sun (July 16) to moan and groan. He claimed he`d no longer feel safe in a library. “Be prepared folks for this is only the beginning. neo-Nazis, racists, bigots and bullies will now use Toronto Libraries as their official meeting place. Libraries will no longer be that haven of calm, peace and safety I so well remember as a child.`

Beside itself that it hadn`t been able to shut down the memorial, elements of the lamestream media took their revenge. 

The sleazy National Post (July 13, 2017) devoted almost a full page to the memorial. Its headline screamed `Far-right extremists converge at memorial. `The reporter wasn`t there and chose to use the weaponized words to signal that the attendees were  `bad`. As if to illustrate this was a large picture of three goons in black masks. The caption read: `Three masked people stood outside the Richview branch of the Toronto Public Library while a memorial for Toronto lawyer Barbara Kulazska was held. `One might reasonably conclude that these thugs were guards or attendees. In fact, they were Antifa who had shown up to protest and were told by the police to get lost. And, not to be picky, Miss Kulazska was not a `Toronto` lawyer. However, the controlled media never let the facts get in the way of a good smear.

And the supposedly “right wing” Toronto Sun (July 13, 2017) ran a rant by Liz Braun “Don’t blame library for hate gathering.” The headline was a lie. The memorial was NOT a “hate” gathering. Hate, sadly is a criminal offence in this country. No one at that meeting was charged let alone convicted for anything said that night. The meeting was to celebrate the life of a brave diligent woman. It wasn’t about hating anybody. Braun had not attended the memorial but described the attendees as ” pathetic anti-Semitic/anti-black/anti-female/homophobic/Islamophobic/etc. garden variety bigots” Nothing at the meeting was said criticizing  Blacks, women,  homosexuals or Moslems. Indeed we were honouring a woman!

Moslem Attorney General Approves “Hate” Charges Against Critic of Moslems

Posted on by

Moslem Attorney General Approves “Hate” Charges Against Critic of Moslems

Yasir Naqvi, Ontario’s Moslem Attorney General had to approve a Peel Region Police request to lay “hate charges” under Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code against Kevin Johnston, a former mayoralty candidate in Mississauga. Interestingly, Johnston is an outspoken opponent of special treatment for Moslems in the Peel District School Board’s schools. He also strongly opposed Motion-103, the anti-Islamophobia motion by Mississauga Moslem MP Iqra Khalid

The Toronto Star (July 25, 2017) reports: “A Mississauga man who has been charged with willful promotion of hatred says he’s ‘not going anywhere,’ and that he intends to run for mayor of the city. The charges come after ‘a lengthy investigation into numerous incidents reported to police, involving Kevin Johnston and concerns information published on various social media sites,’ Peel police said in a news release Monday.

Johnston, 45, was released on bail after a brief appearance in court Monday. The conditions of his release included an order to have no contact with three people, whose names are under a publication ban. He was also ordered to stay 100 metres away from any mosque or Muslim community centre in Ontario, except for when travelling on the road.

 

Johnston, wearing a blue polo shirt and jeans, sat calmly in court as the details of the case were read in court.

Outside the courtroom, he was defiant.

‘I’m going to run for mayor against Bonnie Crombie next election,’ Johnston said. ‘She can’t stop me through the courts.’ …

Johnston has previously ran for mayor, and lost to Mississauga Mayor Crombie in 2014. He is best known for his strong views about the Muslim community, having opposed the construction of a mosque in Meadowvale, offered prize money for videos of students praying on Fridays, and protested against the federal anti-Islamophobia motion, M-103.

Last year, a story published on the Mississauga Gazette site resulted in Crombie filing a hate-crime complaint with Peel police. It was not immediately clear if that complaint prompted Monday’s charges. …

At Queen’s Park, Attorney General Yasir Naqvi said the government “takes allegations of hate crime very seriously. Ontario prosecutes these cases vigorously, where there is a reasonable prospect of conviction. ‘In a multicultural and inclusive province like Ontario, the promotion of hatred stands in direct opposition to our fundamental values of equality and diversity. Hate divides people and communities,’ Naqvi said Monday.”

“Inclusive”, ah, yes, but not of critics of Moslems. “Diversity”, yes, but not for people who fear the Islamification of our society. It’s never been clearer that “diversity” is a code word for anti-White.

Image result for kevin j. johnston freedom report

CITY-TV’s report (July 24) added several more chilling details; “He was released on his own undertaking, under a number of conditions including not being allowed within 100 meters of any mosque of Muslim community centre in Ontario.He has also been ordered not to communicate with Muslim lawyer Zoya Alam, Mississauga Mayor Bonnie Crombie and Liberal MP Iqra Khalid. He was further ordered not to posses firearms and not to reveal any details of his case to anyone outside of his own legal counsel.”

Not allowed “to reveal any details of his case to anyone outside his own legal counsel”? Who imposed these Orwellian conditions, an Ontario Court or Kim-Jong-un of North Korea?

Elitist venom over free-speech lawyer’s remembrance service

Posted on by

Elitist venom over free-speech lawyer’s remembrance service

“Memorial for lawyer draws controversy, July 13
I find it astonishing that such vitriol should be poured out over a remembrance service for a member of the legal profession who passed away so tragically and at such a relatively young age. She broke no laws in her representation of persons whose opinions are not “politically correct” and her actions were no more reprehensible than those of criminal lawyers who specialize in representing those accused of breaking the Criminal Code. Barbara Kulaszka’s professional activities were of considerable assistance in breaking the anti-democratic stranglehold over free speech exercised by the notorious Section 13 and we owe her a debt of gratitude for that. Jeff Goodall, Oshawa” – Toronto Star, July 16th, 2017.

The absolute deluge of vile hatred and venom over Barbara Kulaszka’s remembrance meeting at Toronto’s Richview public library shows the fanatical intolerance and loathing the “politically correct” elites have for anyone daring to disagree with their point of view.

It has been said that leftists always express their firm belief in the rights of others to hold different opinions, but then go into a state of severe shock – followed by rage – when they discover to their amazement that there are, in fact, other opinions…

Far too many columns and editorials have been spewed out on this issue for me to list them all, but I will identify four of them – one in the Toronto Star quoting “victimhood” professional Bernie Farber (1) – which was far “better” than his column in the Toronto Sun, by the way – one by none other than Elise Hategan of “Race Traitor” fame writing in the Canadian Jewish News (2); and, particularly noteworthy for her vicious, stereotypical hyperbole, is the Toronto Sun’s Liz Braun (3).

Plus, there is an interesting item in the National Post worthy of quoting (4).

Bernie Farber rather confusingly states that “Barbara Kulaszka was a fellow traveller in hate groups in this country. She provided legal counsel to neo-Nazis, racists and bigots, and in fact ensured, through some of the work that she did, that hate laws and neo-Nazis and even Nazi war criminals would not be prosecuted in this country.”

Surely the successes that he accuses her of clearly demonstrate that the courts, up to and including the Supreme Court of Canada, very often agreed with her well-argued cases – you need to do better than that, Bernie! Saying that “Her legacy, if she has one, is one of increasing and permitting hatred in Canada” is obviously the sour-grapes whining of a loser.

Hategan’s item is headed by a photo of an Aryan Guard street action in Calgary ten years ago, and the article quoting Farber (and the National Post item) is headed with a photo of three masked toughs dressed in black who stood across the street from the library.

They refused to identify themselves, never tried to enter, and may well have been “planted” to create a false atmosphere of potential violence in hopes this would cause the meeting to be cancelled.

While Hategan does little more than re-hash her “Race Traitor” experiences and try to tie them in to the Kulaszka remembrance, Braun goes to town with such gems as “Kulaszka’s thing was freedom of speech cases; it is a widely held view that she was philosophically on-side with many of her clients” – Braun offers no evidence – and she refers to the attendees as “These pathetic anti-Semitic/anti-black/anti-female/homophobic/Islamophobic/etc. garden variety bigots…”

And, while harping on Mayor John Tory’s “deep concern”, she fails to mention that his involvement was, according to a number of MSM reports, actively solicited by Jewish interests.

I don’t doubt at all that Kulaszka’s work editing Zundel’s book “Did six million really die?” was a professional engagement intended to avoid legal problems arising from the wording of the book; there is no reason to believe she agreed with the contents, or that she did anything other than check it over and edit it for legal risks to her client.

In his article “Far-right extremists converge at memorial for Toronto lawyer” in the National Post on July 12th (4), which was headed with another photo of the unidentified “goons”, Joseph Brean observes that “Kulaszka, who died last month aged 64 but whose death was not publicized until Tuesday, is famous among the Canadian far right for winning acquittals under the law for people charged with hate crimes, or even undoing the laws used to charge them… She was largely responsible, for example, for the fact that Canada has no law against false news and no human-rights ban on internet hate speech, and for the fact that no Nazi has been convicted in Canada of war crimes.”

Barbara Kulaszka was a credit to her profession who served her clients well.

Jeff Goodall.

(1) – See “Memorial goes ahead at Toronto library for lawyer who represented far-right extremists” here.

(2) – See “The Toronto Public Library’s tolerance of intolerance” here.

(3) – See “Don’t blame library for hate gathering” here.

(4) – See “Far-right extremists converge at memorial for Toronto lawyer” here.

This entry was posted on Sunday, July 16th, 2017 at 5:35 pm and is filed under Canadian Interest, Human Rights Industry / Free Speech / “Hate”, Letters / Columns / Coverage, Reference & Background Material, White European Interest. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

YOU OWE US AN APOLOGY

Posted on by

YOU OWE US AN APOLOGY

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 905-566-4455; FAX: 905-566-4820

Website: http://cafe.nfshost.com

Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director

Liz Braun, Columnist,  lbraun@postmedia.com

TORONTO SUN

Dear Ms, Braun:

Your article “Don’t Blame Library for Hate Gathering” (Toronto Sun, July 13, 2017) is a disgrace. Of course, I agree with your conclusion that the library should not discriminate among various political or historical views.

However, you heap defamation and smears on the attendees at the Memorial for lawyer Barbara Kuazska. First, you were not there. You are relying on conjecture or, worse, the lies of mortal enemies of freedom of speech.

Your headline is a lie. The memorial was NOT a “hate” gathering. Hate, sadly is a criminal offence in this country. No one at that meeting was charged let alone convicted for anything said that night. The meeting was to celebrate the life of a brave diligent woman. It wasn’t about hating anybody.

You describe the attendees as ” pathetic anti-Semitic/anti-black/anti-female/homophobic/Islamophobic/etc. garden variety bigots” Nothing at the meeting was said criticizing  Blacks, women,  homosexuals or Moslems. Indeed we were honouring a woman!

As for Jews, the truth is that major Jewish lobby groups (Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, Friends of the Simon Weisenthal Centre, and former Canadian Jewish Congress spokesman Bernie Farber) were in the forefront of those trying to arm-twist politicians and the library into cancelling the memorial.  We know many Jews support free speech but these official free speech haters give the Jewish community a bad name.

Too bad you were not there, Liz. You might have seen several coloured folks in our ranks honouring Barbara Kulazska. I suppose they were White supremacists too!

The Sun owes us an apology and its readers the truth.

Paul Fromm

Director

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

Don’t Blame Library For Hate Gathering

by Liz Braun, The Toronto Sun

July 13, 2017

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/07/13/toronto-public-library-reviewing-policy-after-event-with-ties-to-racist-groups

Don’t blame library for hate gathering

www.torontosun.com

The city is up in arms over a memorial held Wednesday for a lawyer whose name was synonymous with hate groups.

TORONTO – The city is up in arms over a memorial held Wednesday for a lawyer whose name was synonymous with hate groups.

The usual suspects — white supremacist types Paul Fromm and Marc Lemire — gathered at Richview Library in Etobicoke to honour Barbara Kulaszka, who provided counsel over the years to Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel, Nazi rocket scientist Arthur Rudolph, accused war criminal Imre Finta and others of that ilk.

Kulaszka’s thing was freedom of speech cases; it is a widely held view that she was philosophically on-side with many of her clients.

At any rate, people were aghast, and rightly so, that any such meeting of hate-mongers was permitted at a branch of the library. Advocacy groups (such as the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs) were outraged that persons with known neo-Nazi ties were allowed to book space at the library, and even the mayor waded into the controversy saying he was “deeply concerned” by the gathering.

As a result, the Toronto Public Library says they will be reviewing their policy. They did not endorse the event, a library spokesman said, but they were legally unable to get out of it.

Let’s be honest here. The person who rented this space for Kulaszka’s memorial probably had no idea who and what was involved. A group of old white people? That could be anybody in that part of Etobicoke. These pathetic anti-Semitic/anti-black/anti-female/homophobic/Islamophobic/etc. garden variety bigots could only raise 25 people to gather on behalf of Kulaszka, and far more of them codgers than boogie men.

Could we please not blame the library? The libraries in our fair city are increasingly the drop-in-centres-of-last-resort, trying to keep the world literate even as they deteriorate into ad hoc old folks’ homes, psychiatric waystations, homeless shelters and day-care alternatives. Libraries are among the few places left where those on the fringes of society may freely enter, and that’s what happened Wednesday night when a group of old nutcase hate advocates gathered to swap yarns of fear and ignorance.

As we enter a new dark ages, racism and hatred are on the rise globally, fuelled by stupidity and liberated by the anonymity of social media. And those who gathered on behalf of Kulaszka are representative of all that, but the library is not responsible.

Wayne Sumner, a University of Toronto professor emeritus specializing in ethics and freedom of expression, has already said that the library did well to err on the side of free speech. He told CP that barring such events as the memorial, “raises disturbing possibilities of picking and choosing among points of view and what sort of speech is allowed and what sort of speech is not.”

If things deteriorate into hate speech? That’s a police matter, said Sumner, not a library issue.

The library did its best by having a staff member monitor the meeting.

This led one memorial attendant — who wished to remain anonymous, as these sad-sacks always do — to complain that there was a spy in their midst.

“What kind of country are we living in?” she asked, to which a librarian might have answered, “The kind in which people know their history, particularly if it involves book burning.”

 

Liz Braun, Toronto Sun

 

lbraun@postmedia.com