Tag Archives: Paul Fromm

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.

Toasts to Perseverence

Posted on by

Toasts to Perseverence

 

 

BUDAPEST. October 5, 2014. Despite efforts by the Hungarian government  to shut down the “Future of Europe” conference sponsored by the National Policy Institute, a truncated meeting was held Saturday evening(as I already reported).

 

Today many of us went on a walking tour of Budapest, meeting in the impressive Heroes Square.

 

 

 

 

 

Many of us went on to the moving Museum of Terror which focused on the horrific communist regime that ruled Hungary for 44 years. Ironically, some anti-racists hollering through megaphones at the museum staff and still protesting our meeting which was already over, were unaware that some 30 of us hated freethinkers had walked right past them.

 

Foot weary, close to 50 of us gathered, fittingly, in the Dracula Restaurant. The owners bemoaned the fact that Sunday evenings are usually slow with often just half a dozen customers. They were overjoyed to see us and by night’s end had run out of beer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

A number of toasts were made by Dutch, Flemish, British and American attendees.

 

Jared Taylor said: “Despite all the bullying by the government, you came out. To all our European brothers around the world.”

 

 

 

 

One of the 56ers, a veteran of the Hungarian Revolution, said: “When Victor Orban (the prime minister) learned of the leftist protests against this conference he shit his pants and tried to ban us. Still we prevailed. Orban got no credit. Just yesterday Victoria Neuland (she of the “Fuck the EU”  when the U.S. was agitating in the Ukraine) denounced him the day after he banned this conference. To us!”

 

I toasted the nationalists and free thinkers:  “To your courage and determination to insist on free speech. Join me in that determined vow that has so often thundered across the Anglo-Saxon world: ‘NO SURRENDER!'”

 

Why the Canadian State Literally Burns Books

Posted on by

Why the Canadian State Literally Burns Books

 August 20, 2014 Commentary

Paul Fromm, Critic of State Censorship & Defender of British Common Law Principles Paul Fromm, Critic of State Censorship & Defender of British Common Law Principles

Non-Aligned Media
August 19, 2014

I wish to bring to the attention of Non-Aligned Media readers the following episode of “The Fighting Side of Me”, the radio show hosted by Paul Fromm—founder of the Canadian Association for Free Expression—which I stumbled across on the highly stimulating website ofCounter-Currents Publishing. The show, “Paul Fromm on Censorship in Canada”, as the title intimates, addresses the problem of state-enforced censorship in Canada.

FULL SHOW – Listen here (right click to download)

Fromm elucidates the different ways certain forms of intellectual expression—most notably criticism of the organized Jewish community—are criminalized and expunged from the public domain in the second largest country on earth. The most notorious method is the deployment of armed police to the home or workplace of a targeted heretic who will typically be temporarily flung in prison, interrogated and then railroaded either through the pro-Zionist courts or through Canada’s federal and provincial “Human Rights” commissions. The Canadian state has incarcerated many violators of state-sponosred political correctness under this dispensation, most recently an elderly blogger named Arthur Topham who committed the “crime” of authoring a satirical article which delegitimized Israel.

Of course florid, sentimentalist lingo is harnessed by the well-paid “Human Rights” impresarios to fool the Canadian public into believing that they have a vested interest in relinquishing the hard-won right to freely express oneself in a peaceful and unfettered way. The naked truth is that this prevention-of-hate-speech-charade has little to do with affirming genuine Human Rights. It is all about preventing criticism of those who are foisting radical un-Canadian policies upon the citizenry of this once-loved nation. Just as the potentates of Saudi Arabia incarcerate their domestic critics, so those who rule Canada seek to imprison interlocutors who accurately delineate the anatomy of power in the former British Dominion now ruled out of Tel Aviv.

Implicit to this authoritarian procedure is the Canadian state ideology of Jewish Exceptionalism. White Europeans, Arabs, Muslims, Persians and Christians, in particular, can have their traditions excoriated and deconstructed by the Jewish literati but if they repay the favour they may find themselves behind bars. Judaism and Jewishness are treated exceptionally by the Canadian legal system due to the wealth and power of the organized Jewish community. Canada has the best legal system money can buy.

The Canadian State Burns Books Written By Dr. David Duke thus Preventing Canadian Citizens from Formulating Their Own Conclusions About the Merits of His WorkThe Canadian State Burns Books Written By Dr. David Duke Thus Preventing Canadian Citizens From Drawing Their Own Conclusions About the Merits of His Work

Fromm emphasizes an additional means of censorship which often goes under the radar of those interested in restoring the European tradition of freedom of expression in Canada, namely customs officials snatching and then disposing of books, DVDs and other paraphernalia deemed politically-incorrect. A 2008 Canada Boarder Services Agency posting acknowledged that such seizures are potentially violative of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which was conferred upon Canada by Britain in 1982:

Unlike many other goods with which CBSA officials routinely deal, expressive materials are protected by the freedom of expression guarantee set out in subsection 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Although not specifically tested in the courts to date, it is believed that, in respect of hate propaganda, sedition and treason, as with obscenity, the infringement of section 2(b) of the Charter is justified under its own section 1, because the overriding objective of the law is the avoidance of harm to society and that is a sufficiently substantial concern to warrant a restriction on freedom of expression.

CBSA, on behalf of those who rule Canada, claims the right to revoke a constitutionally-protected right, without judicial sanction, as is implied by the admission that their presumptive actions have “not [been] especially tested in the courts to date”. They claim this abrogation of a constitutionally-protected right is intended to mitigate against an alleged “harm to society” deemed arbitrarily to be of “substantial concern to warrant a restriction on freedom of expression”. In a posting on the CAFÉ website Fromm has listed some of the intellectual goods which CBSA has deemed of “substantial concern”:

[T]he Frankfurt School, a dvd produced by the Conservative Citizens Foundation; Communism With the Mask Off, a speech delivered in Nurnberg on September 13, 1935 by Dr. Joseph Goebbels; Pre-Emptive Ideology, Occasional Papers of the Citizens’ Foundation, Issue #7; The King Holiday and its Meaning, speech by Senator Jesse Helms, introduction by Samuel Francis; The Citizens Informer, Vol. 45, No. 1 (newspaper published thrice yearly by the Council of Conservative Citizens); The First Freedom, June, 2012, a newspaper; The Alabamian, May-June, 2012, a newsletter published by the Alabama Council of Conservative Citizens and CofCC Board member Leonard Wilson; and the Northwest Observer, Volumes #115 (February, 2012), #116 (March, 2012), and #117 (April, 2012), published by long-time U.S. writer Harold Covington.

Some of these materials are particularly benign. The documentary The Frankfurt School, for example, is merely a compilation of critiques by academics of what was arguably the most influential sociological tendency of the 20th Century—albeit one characterized by Israeli intellectual Gershom Scholem as a “Jewish sect”. “The King Holiday” is merely a speech about Martin Luther King delivered by a former US senator. Nevertheless, these scholarly materials were prevented from entering the country, clearly based on top-down political motivations rather than concern for society as a whole, which would benefit from having the forces critiqued in the aforementioned texts exposed to more, rather than less, intellectual criticism. Fromm adds:

How are books destroyed? A good supporter of CAFÉ who had a copy of David Duke’s [book] Jewish Supremacism seized some years ago, was told by a Customs officials that they were “burned.” So,our thought police practise book burning in Canada.

That’s right! The Canadian state—whose representatives are incessantly lecturing other countries on democracy and civil liberties—burns books to stop citizens reading them! The following message is projected by the state: Don’t worry about forming your own conclusions about this or that book or argument lowly citizens, the Canadian government has done it for you!

As I stated in a recent interview on Press TV, the organized Jewish community forms a significant locus of power in Canada. They are not the only locus of power but, in their totality, they wield disproportionate power and influence. The pro-Zionist uniformity of Canada’s parliamentarians during the recent massacre in Gaza—which was out-of-sync with the preponderance of world leaders—indicates this. If it is to be that Canadian citizens are, in effect, prohibited by law from criticizing that particular locus of power, which has great influence over both domestic and foreign policy, then this polity can be described as nothing else than a dictatorship. The dictates of the leaders of a hegemonic group in Canada, if critiqued too effectively, will result in the incarceration of the critic. Books which are critical of that elite group will be burned. DVDs containing critiques of that influential clique will be trashed. These are hallmarks of dictatorship.

Thankfully Paul Fromm is committed to Canada and its foundational system, based on British values including tolerance of conflicting viewpoints, rather than the foreign eliminationist values which have been foisted upon ordinary Canadians by agents of global Zionism and their puppet politicians.

Non-Aligned Media Interview With CAFE Director Paul Fromm

Posted on by

Non-Aligned Media Interview With CAFE Director Paul Fromm

FROMM

On this second episode of the Non-Aligned Media podcast, host Brandon Martinez is joined by special guest Paul Fromm, a Canadian free speech activist and mayoralty candidate in the city of Mississauga.

Fromm and Martinez discuss the duplicitous nature of Canada’s “hate speech” laws and the malevolent agenda of the political correctness commissars who enforce them. Noted in the show was the Jewish-Zionist origins of the “hate” laws in Canada and the negative influence of that community on Canada’s broader political culture.

Fromm also outlined his political programme as a candidate for mayor of Mississauga in Ontario, which includes fighting traffic gridlock in the city and halting immigration.

Fromm’s websites are http://cafe.nfshost.com  and  http://frommmayormississauga.com

Written by 

Brandon Martinez is an independent writer and journalist from Canada who specializes in foreign policy issues, international affairs and 20th and 21st century history. For years he has written on Zionism, Israel-Palestine, American and Canadian foreign policy, war, terrorism and deception in media and politics. His articles and analysis have appeared on Press TV, Veterans News Now, Media With Conscience News, Whatsupic, Intifada Palestine, Information Clearing House, What Really Happened, and other alternative media outlets. He is the co-founder of Non-Aligned Media with Joshua Blakeney and the author of an upcoming book addressing Israeli involvement in the 9/11 attacks. Readers can contact him at martinezperspective[at]hotmail.com or visit his blog at http://martinezperspective.com

http://nonalignedmedia.com/2014/09/nam-podcast-episode-2/

Fromm & Whatcott Visit Political Prisoner Brad Love

Posted on by
Fromm & Whatcott Visit Political Prisoner Brad Love
 
 
Photo: Fromm & Whatcott Visit Political Prisoner Brad Love LINDSAY, Ontario, May 15, 2014. Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, and free speech warrior and opponent of the homosexual agenda Bill Whatcott visited Canadian political prisoner Brad Love today at the Central East Correctional Centre here in the Kawartha Lakes region of Southern Ontario. Beforee entering to visit Mr. Love, who is scheduled to be released on June 15, Mr.. Fromm and Whatcott had to leave their keys, coins,, wallets, jackets and cellphones in a locker. Although they could only see Mr. Love through thick Plexiglas, neither visitor was allowed to bring pen or paper. These insane rules seem designed to discourage visitors and further isolate the prisoner. "The real Canada is not the country the newspapers tell their readers about," Mr. Love told his visitors. Free speech is fine, they say, if you speak your mind in the Ukraine. Look at the favourable publicity for all those protests in the Ukraine. But not here. If you criticize immigration or Jewish groups, they give you the Brad Love treatment," he explained. Mr. Whatcott reported to his supporters: "The last few days have been interesting and busy. Paul Fromm of the Canadian Association for Free Expression asked me to speak at his Alternative Forum and pretty much gave me unmitigated freedom to say what I wanted to say. Paul also offered to take me to the Central East Correctional Centre in Lindsay, Ont, to see Brad Love for myself. Indeed when I first heard of Brad Love’s story I was highly skeptical as we are supposed to be living in a Parliamentary democracy after all (with a few problems for sure) and I thought to myself there is no way someone could be in jail for writing letters and expressing views. Surely the guy wrote a death threat or something. Image Here is the Central East Correctional Centre where Brad Love is being held for his crime of letter writing. Paul Fromm and I went to visit him. Well actually Brad Love is in jail for expressing views by writing letters to various elected representatives, the Chief of Police for York Region and a couple Jewish lobby groups. While Brad's letters could be perceived as offensive to some, perhaps even to me, they were completely devoid of threats of violence, blackmail, libel or any other thing that one could expect to fall into the jurisdiction of a criminal offense. Brad’s letters were rants about immigration and Zionism. Now for certain not all of Brad’s views are my cup of tea, but that really isn't the point. Brad Love is in jail for views and only views. His prison sentence is not insignificant either. Brad Love was sentenced to 18 months in prison for his first batch of letters after being convicted under Canada's so-called "hate" law and then he was given another 18 months (the maximum sentence possible) in prison for probation violation after writing another letter. Unlike other offenders who commit crimes like rape or robbery Brad is not allowed to write any letters while in jail. He is not allowed to write friends, family or even his lawyer. Image As you can see in the background the Central East Correctional Centre is a maximum security facility. Canada’s notorious letter writer languishes in there, unable to do any productive work. He is allowed into the yard for 20 minutes of fresh air a day.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
LINDSAY, Ontario, May 15, 2014. Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, and free speech warrior and opponent of the homosexual agenda Bill  Whatcott visited Canadian political prisoner Brad Love today at the Central East Correctional Centre here in the Kawartha Lakes region of Southern Ontario.
 
Beforee entering to visit Mr. Love, who is scheduled to be released on June 15, Mr.. Fromm and Whatcott had to leave their keys, coins,, wallets, jackets and cellphones in a locker. Although they could only see Mr. Love through thick Plexiglas, neither visitor was allowed to bring pen or paper. These insane rules seem designed to discourage visitors and further isolate the prisoner.
 
 
 
 
 
 

“The real Canada is not what newspapers tell their readers about,” Mr. Love told his visitors. Free speech is fine, they say, if you speak your mind in the Ukraine. Look at the favourable publicity for all those protests in the Ukraine. But not here. If you criticize immigration or Jewish groups, they give you the Brad Love treatment,” he explained.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Whatcott reported to his supporters:
 
“The last few days have been interesting and busy. Paul Fromm of the Canadian Association for Free Expression asked me to speak at his Alternative Forum and pretty much gave me unmitigated freedom to say what I wanted to say. Paul also offered to take me to the Central East Correctional Centre in Lindsay, Ont, to see Brad Love for myself. Indeed when I first heard of Brad Love’s story I was highly skeptical as we are supposed to be living in a Parliamentary democracy after all (with a few problems for sure) and I thought to myself there is no way someone could be in jail for writing letters and expressing views. Surely the guy wrote a death threat or something.

Image
Here is the Central East Correctional Centre where Brad Love is being held for his crime of letter writing. Paul Fromm and I went to visit him.

Well actually Brad Love is in jail for expressing views by writing letters to various elected representatives, the Chief of Police for York Region and a couple Jewish lobby groups. While Brad’s letters could be perceived as offensive to some, perhaps even to me, they were completely devoid of threats of violence, blackmail, libel or any other thing that one could expect to fall into the jurisdiction of a criminal offense. Brad’s letters were rants about immigration and Zionism.

Now for certain not all of Brad’s views are my cup of tea, but that really isn’t the point. Brad Love is in jail for views and only views. His prison sentence is not insignificant either. Brad Love was sentenced to 18 months in prison for his first batch of letters after being convicted under Canada’s so-called “hate” law and then he was given another 18 months (the maximum sentence possible) in prison for probation violation after writing another letter. Unlike other offenders who commit crimes like rape or robbery Brad is not allowed to write any letters while in jail. He is not allowed to write friends, family or even his lawyer.

Image
As you can see in the background the Central East Correctional Centre is a maximum security facility. Canada’s notorious letter writer languishes in there, unable to do any productive work. He is allowed into the yard for 20 minutes of fresh air a day.

Posted on by
007Free Speech Supporters Condemn Anti-Christian Bigotry of the Law Society of Upper Canada

 



​ ​

TORONTO. May 16, 2014. About 30 protesters held a noon-time vigil outside the Law Society of Upper Canada in downtown Toronto today. An eclectic group of Christian spokesmen and free speech supporters joined by the Canadian Association for Free Expression denounced a recent decision by the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) to not recognize graduates of the planned Trinity Western University Law School because of their fundamentalist Christian principles.

Trinity Western University is an evangelical Christian college in Langley, BC. It requires faculty and students to pledge to follow traditional Christian morality including refraining from sex outside of marriage. Critics say this pledge discriminates against homosexuals. No one is required to attend Trinity Western University. There is a wide variety of secular alternatives.

The proselytizers of the homosexual agenda who have led a campaign, first to deny graduates of this university the right to teach in B.C.(eventually overturned by the Supreme Court of Canada) and then to deny the planned law school legal accreditation (the move failed) now have pressured provincial law societies in to declare that graduates of the law school will not be granted accreditation. So far, the anti-Christian campaign has succeeded in Nova Scotia and Ontario.

One of the protest leaders Rev. David Lynn, founder of Christian Positive Space (www.christianpositivespace.com) said much of Ontario’s curriculum is “biblephobic.” He noted that well over 70 per cent of Canada is Christian. “We say to the Law Society of Upper Canada: ‘You have to be more tolerant. You are saying Christians do not have the right to practise law in Ontario,. You are anti-Canadian.”

Gary McHale, an activist who led protests against the failure by the Ontario Provincial Police to enforce court injunctions against radical Indians who occupied and still occupy private (now Crown) land in Caledonia, Ontario, noted there was an effort to ban graduates of Trinity Western from teaching in British Columbia. “The case went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada and they ruled that religious views should not exclude a person from the classroom. Now, the Law Society of Upper Canada wants to exclude Christians from the practise of law.”


 ​

The story of Mr. McHale’s battle against politically correct policing — soft on native thugs occupying land in defiance of an injunction, and harsh on White resident merely driving through their own community or trying to counter-protest the occupation — has just been published by Freedom Press (www.freedompress.ca). It is entitled Victory In the No-Go Zone: Winning the Fight Against Two-Tier Policing.

A contingent from FreedomPress, led by President Tristan Emmanuel, also attended the protest.

Bill Whatcott spoke of his campaign to keep radical homosexual material — including discussions of anal sex — excluded from elementary school in Saskatchewan. His leafleting led to human rights complaints, a conviction and a $17,5000 fine. He fought this all the way to the Supreme Court which overturned the Saskatchewan Court of Appeals reversing Mr. Whatcott’s conviction. The Supreme Court , “and shame on them,” Mr. Whatcott said, upheld anti-Christian speech censorship and ruled that truth, intent, sincerely held religious beliefs or political opinions were irrelevant. “It was determined that making statements like this is hate. They acknowledged that although my flyers might be factual, if used for a hateful purpose — and they weren’t — advocating traditional Christian views on sexual behaviour could be censored. I have been left with over $100,000 in legal costs” payable to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.

Paul Fromm Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, called the Law Society of Upper Canada “Christian haters.”

“The issue here,” he said, “is the decision by the Law Society of Upper Canada to not allow graduates of the planned Trinity Western University Law School to practise in the Province of Ontario. The ironic thing is that Trinity Western has not even opened its law school yet and hasn’t graduated a single student. That is the definition of bigotry — to make a decision before the facts are in. The LSUC is very much under the control of the homosexual lobby. The privileges of homosexual trump the rights of Christians. It’s wrong. And we’re standing here for free speech.”

Click on the picture below for the link to hear Paul Fromm’s remarks.

 

You’re a “Nazi” If You Support Free Speech

Posted on by
You’re a “Nazi” If You Support Free Speech
 
Anti-racists are just really anti-White. Consider this defaced poster from Kingston, Ontario. A new European awareness nationalist group has formed there called The Euro-United Front.
 
They recently put up posters saying “Freedom of  Speech Means Everyone, Not Just Ones You Agree With.”

 

Photo: You're a "Nazi" If You Support Free Speech Anti-racists are just really anti-White. Consider this defaced poster from Kingston, Ontario. A new European awareness nationalist group has formed there called The Euro-United Front. They recently put up posters saying "Freedom of Speech Means Everyone, Not Just Ones You Agree With." It all seems perfectly obvious and middle of the road, but not form some anonymous clod with a magic marker who scrawled "Nazis" on the poster. So, supporter free speech means you are a Nazi. While this is vandalism by one individual, it points to the fact that Canadians need a lot of encouragement and educating. Fro nearly 40 years, we've been lectured that free speech must be limited, that minority sensitivities must prevail and that not all views are "appropriate" or acceptable. However, without freedom of speech, all our other rights are in peril CAFE remains committed to standing for free speech, no matter how unpopular the opinions may be. Speaking is not the crime; attempting to silence others is. Paul Fromm Director Canadian Association for Free Expression We Need Your Help! We need your support for the McCorkill Will Case in St. John, NB. We need your help to keep CAFÉ in the courts punching for freedom of speech. We need your help to support free speech victims. CAFE, Box 332, Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3 ___ Here is my donation of $_______ to help CAFÉ’s work in supporting the victims of censorship and McCorkill cases. ___ Please renew my subscription for 2014 to the Free Speech Monitor ($15). $___ Doug Christie booklet order from back of this coupon. Please charge _____my VISA#________________________________________________________________ Expiry date: __________ Signature:_______________________________________________________________________________ Name:____________________________________________________________________________________ Address: __________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________Email______________________________ Doug Christie Free Speech Booklets For 30 years, Doug Christie, the Battling Barrister, has been Canada’s outstanding free speech attorney. He passed away of liver cancer, all too young, on March 11, at age 66. Order his outstanding free speech booklets published in C-FAR’S Canadian Issue Series. __ The Zundel Trial & Free Speech by Douglas Christie (1985) $4.00 __ Thought Crimes Trial: The Keegstra Case by Douglas Christie (1987) $4.00 __ Free Speech IS the Issue by Douglas Christie (1990) ($5) [Tick booklets you want here and indicate the number and enter dollar amount on the other side of this coupon.]
 
 
It all seems perfectly obvious and middle of the road, but not form some anonymous clod with a magic marker who scrawled “Nazis” on the poster. So, supporter free speech means you are a Nazi.
 
While this is vandalism by one individual, it points to the fact that Canadians need a lot of encouragement and educating. Fro nearly 40 years, we’ve been lectured that free speech must be limited, that minority sensitivities must prevail and that not all views are “appropriate” or acceptable.
 
However, without freedom of speech, all our other rights are in peril
 
CAFE remains committed to standing for free speech, no matter how unpopular the opinions may be.
 
Speaking is not the crime; attempting to silence others is.
 
Paul Fromm
Director
Canadian Association for Free Expression

 We Need Your Help!

 

We need your support for the McCorkill Will Case in St. John, NB. We need your help to keep CAFÉ in the courts punching for freedom of speech. We need your help to support free speech victims.

 

CAFE, Box 332, Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

 

___    Here is my donation of $_______ to help CAFÉ’s  work in supporting the victims of censorship and McCorkill cases.

___   Please renew my subscription for 2014 to the Free Speech Monitor ($15).

$___  Doug Christie booklet order from back of this coupon.

 

Please charge _____my VISA#________________________________________________________________

 

Expiry date: __________ Signature:_______________________________________________________________________________

 

Name:____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Address: __________________________________________________________________________________           

 

_______________________________________________________Email______________________________

 

Doug Christie Free Speech  Booklets

For 30 years, Doug Christie, the Battling Barrister, has been Canada’s outstanding free speech attorney. He passed away of liver cancer, all too young, on March 11, at age 66. Order his outstanding free speech booklets published in C-FAR’S Canadian Issue Series.

 

 __ The Zundel Trial & Free Speech by Douglas Christie (1985) $4.00

__  Thought Crimes Trial: The Keegstra Case by Douglas Christie (1987) $4.00

__   Free Speech IS the Issue by Douglas Christie  (1990) ($5)

[Tick booklets you want here and indicate the number and enter dollar amount on the other side of this coupon.]

CAFE & Free Speech Supporters Heard In McCorkill Will Case; Judge Reserves

Posted on by
CAFE & Free Speech  Supporters Heard In McCorkill Will Case; Judge Reserves
 
St. John, New Brunswick. January 28, 2014. Lawyers defending the  right of a man to will his estate to a controversial group had their day in court today. At the end of this morning’s session before the Court of Queen’s Bench here, Judge Grant reserved decision about a motion brought by Isabelle McCorkell, sister of the late Professor Robert McCorkill who had willed his collection of antique coins and artefacts to the U.S. National Alliance.
 
However, before the free speech lawyers defending the bequest were heard, the third of three interveners advocating the nullification of the will addressed the court. Danys Delaquis, representing the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, said: “CIJA opposes anti-Semitism, racism and discrimination. There is no room for any Jewish person in the White space the National Alliance seeks to create,” he complained. “If the bequest is not voided it will be detrimental to the Canadian Jewish community,” he added.
 
“Where is the evidence from Mr. Gleibe and Mr. Streed [the executor] that the bequest will not be used in ways detrimental to the Jewish community?”
 
“The Peel Board of Education had found the National Alliance to be ‘a well known White supremacist organization.’ Therefore, it would be quite reasonable for this court to make this finding of fact as was done in a grievance terminating Mr. Fromm as  a teacher.” A late CIJA affidavit from one Simon Fogel smeared CAFE director Paul Fromm in an ad hominem attack. Mr. Fromm is not a beneficiary in this case. The grievance finding had merely restated accusations about the NA. The grievance board had never investigated the NA.
 
Mr. Delaquis then issued a warning: “If a barrister or solicitor here in New Brunswick adopted the views of the National Alliance, he would soon be out of work. The role of regulatory bodies is vital to see the values of inclusiveness we hold prevail.” The St. John lawyer seemed to see no irony in recommending the exclusion of dissident opinions from his ideal universe of “inclusiveness.”
 
He urged the Court to take an activist approach: “The Courts cannot leave it to the legislature.”

 

 

There are no redeeming qualities in the National Alliance in regard to Canadian public policy,” he insisted. “The National Alliance excludes an entire people from its White space. This is repugnant and offensive. The public interest must outweigh the wishes of Mr. McCorkill. Can the Court allow a testamentary gift to stand that is contrary to public policy?” he challenged the judge.
 
Rising for the defence was John Hughes, a tall stately lawyer from Moncton with a shock of white hair.” “I am acting for the Estate of Robert McCorkill, not the National Alliance,” he explained. “There is no propaganda or hate speech in the will. No one has argued that Robert McCorkill was not capable of making this bequest and the bequest is clear.”
 
“The National Alliance,” he explained, “is described as an incorporated company in the State of Virginia, with an office in West Virginia. There is no evidence the National Alliance has violated any U.S. law and it remains a U.S. corporation in good standing. There is no evidence the National Alliance was ever convicted or charged with an offence in either the U.S. or Canada. Is the NA duty bound to obey the law of any country but its own?” he asked.
 
“The  affidavit of the Southern Poverty Law Centre’s Mark Potok’s points to six ‘contact points’ the National Alliance had in Canada in 2003 — Toronto, Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, London, Ottawa — but none in New Brunswick. Potok admits a name can be included on a ‘hate list’ for merely the mentioning of a P.O. Box. Erich Gleibe, National Chairman of the NA, said in his affidavit that, as of 2013, the NA has no programmes in Canada.”
 
“There is no evidence,” he added, “that the National Alliance has ever held a meeting in New Brunswick. Without a credible presence in New Brunswick, the NA is subject to the jurisdiction it resides in; namely, West Virginia, where the glorious First Amendment with its guarantee of freedom of speech is the law that governs it, not the laws of Canada.”
 
“The National Alliance is a peaceable organization that promotes and exchanges ideas and does not cross the line into crime. Therefore, the National Alliance qualifies as a beneficiary under the law governing it — U.S. law.”
 
Photo
CAFE Director Paul Fromm in press scrum
Referring to the applicant and her allies as “the unruly chorus about the law of public policy,” Mr. Hughes argued: “Courts can make decisions for the restraint of the population under their jurisdiction, like the New Brunswick horses in the Wishart case (the frequently cited case where a provision requiring the shooting of the man’s four horses was overturned by a Court.)”
 
“The disposition of this will either way will have no effect on the people of New Brunswick. The appropriate decision is for the Court to follow the guidance of Sec. 17 of the Interpretation Act and dismiss this application with costs.”
 
The final submissions were from Andy Lodge, a well organized litigator from St. John, representing the Canadian Association for Free Expression. “I am not here to defend the National Alliance,” he said. “I have listened for many hours and read through 1,000 pages of legal documentation and I am struck by one point — all the energy and money spent over the past six months, with very little time spent on the actual McCorkill will.”
 
“There is no legal basis,” Mr. Lodge argued, “to challenge the McCorkill will. It is a valid will, properly constructed and compliant with the Wills Act. No words in this will are contrary to any public policy. This is a very significant point and the real reason this Court should refuse this applicant.”
 
“Other interveners,” he continued, “are very concerned about the character, written words and behaviour of the National Alliance. That alone is not enough to challenge a will.”
 
“Make no mistake,” Mr. Lodge warned, “the applicant and the supporting interveners are trying to get this Court to go where no Court has gone before. The applicant is trying to get this Court to evaluate the beneficiary and to find effectively that the National Alliance is not worthy to receive a testamentary gift — the ‘public policy issue.’ Despite legal arguments over the past six months, there is no evidence of any members of the National Alliance being charged with crimes. Otherwise, the representative of the Attorney General of New Brunswick [Mr. Williams] would be downstairs charging the National Alliance.”
 
And, he continued, “even if a person is charged with a crime that does not disqualify him from receiving a bequest.” He pointed out that in the very few precedents where the court did nullify a section of a will it was because of the language of the will; for instance, the much referenced Wishart horse case, where the will mandated the shooting of the horses.
 
“There is no language of hate in this will,” he explained. “My learned friends who want to argue that ‘hate speech’ is not allowed in Canada are engaged in an exercize in futility. The real question gets lost and that is whether to prevent possible future acts from happening a person can be excluded from receiving a gift from a testator in New Brunswick or Canada. There is no precedent for this very large and drastic step where receiving a bequest depends on the character of the beneficiaries. Are we saying a known drug dealer can never receive a bequest? What about Greenpeace or pro-life groups or any organization dedicated to private health care? Some of their beliefs are against current ‘public policy’ in Canada.”
 
Pursuing his argument, he added: “We open beneficiaries up to examination of their writings, character and beliefs. Where is the new line? This evaluation of the beneficiary should not be permitted at all to avoid drastic pitfalls in a free and democratic society.”
 
And, he said, “none of the examples of case law examined the beneficiaries.”
 
Imagine two siblings left an estate. “If we begin evaluating beneficiaries, it would be in their best interests to slander each other as unworthy. It would be in their financial interests to smear each other.”
 
“Would my learned friends be here today if the money had been given to Mr. Gliebe?” he asked. “If the courts allow the examination of the character of beneficiaries, where is the certainty in counselling a client on the drafting of his will?” he wondered,.
 
“This Court shouldn’t be used to debate ‘hate’,” he said emphatically in his lilting Newfoundland accent. “Make no mistake: The applicant and the other interveners are trying to open up the courts to an avalanche of beneficiary disputes. They are opening a Pandora’s Box. There will be no limit to what is potentially relevant.”
 
Mr. Lodge pointed out: “In the past, Courts stuck to the wording of the will to establish public policy. I submit respectfully that a finding for the applicant will do more harm than good.”
 
“We have already seen bad effect happening here, with the attack on other people’s character in the most recent CIJA affidavit [attacking Paul Fromm, Director of CAFE]. Suffice it to say, the affidavit contained personal and irrelevant information intending to discredit Mr. Fromm. It was an attack on his character. He is not even a beneficiary in this case. Why did CIJA do this? Because character has now become an issue in estate litigation! Discredit the other beneficiary and the more likely you are to get their portion of the bequest voided and get more for yourself.”
 
“That is what Isabelle McCorkill is doing here today, trying to get more money,” he charged.
 
“Whether the National Alliance’s values are congruent with the values of Canada should not be the issue. Allowing this applicant to succeed by assailing the character of others should not be permitted,” he concluded.
 
Just before noon Judge Grant announced: “I am going to reserve my decision. I’ll get my decision out as quickly as I can.” — Paul Fromm

 

Judge reserves decision in unusual estate case

Posted on by

TELEGRAPH JOURNAL PIC OF PAUL AND MALCOLMJudge reserves decision in unusual estate case

JENNIFER PRITCHETT Telegraph-Journal
January 28, 2014

 

Malcolm Ross attended the second day of the trial as an observer. Paul Fromm in foreground

Photo: Jennifer Pritchett/Telegraph-Journal

SAINT JOHN – A Court of Queen’s Bench judge has reserved his decision on whether a Saint John man’s will is legal and can bequeath about $250,000 in rare coins and antiquities to an American neo-Nazi group.

Harry Robert McCorkill left his estate to the National Alliance when he died in 2004. A decade later, his sister, some rights groups and the province of New Brunswick went to court to prevent the money from flowing to the white supremacist, anti-Semitic organization.

The trial into the matter, held Monday and Tuesday, saw lawyers from both sides make arguments in an unusual legal case that weighs peoples’ individual right to leave their estate to whomever – and whatever type of organization – they choose against the court’s ability to intervene in special circumstances that are deemed against “public policy.”

There’s little case law on the subject and in many ways, the debate around the McCorkill estate is unique and breaks new legal ground.

Dan Delaquis, a lawyer for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, told the court Tuesday that the gift, if it’s permitted to stand, will be “detrimental to the Jewish community” and will result in an erosion of Canadian values because the National Alliance has a mandate of hate and is a well-known white supremacist group.

“We submit in this case that the public interest must outweigh the wish of Mr. McCorkill,” he said.

Marc-Antoine Chiasson, a lawyer for Isabelle Rose McCorkill, argued that one need only look at the National Alliance’s own handbook to see firsthand how it purports a racist message.

He read excerpts of the small handbook in court on Monday, highlighting how it points to “white” living spaces with white schools and residential areas with the overall view to create a white world.

Chiasson also pointed to the words of National Alliance founder William Luther Pierce and described his books, Hunter and The Turner Diaries, which were written under the pseudonym “Andrew Macdonald,” as repugnant.

But Andy Lodge, a lawyer for the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE), told the court Tuesday that the fact that an organization may be considered “morally reprehensible” should have no impact on whether it can be a beneficiary of an estate. He pointed out that there are no laws prohibiting even a serial killer or a drug dealer to receive assets from a will.

For the court to evaluate whether a beneficiary such as the National Alliance is against “public policy,” he argued, would open “Pandora’s box.”

He said it would do more harm than good if the courts started assessing a beneficiary’s past or try to predict how they would spend the money they receive from a will.

Lodge described the court debate over McCorkill’s will as an “exercise in futility.” He argued there is no legal basis to challenge the will because it’s valid, follows New Brunswick’s Wills Act and contains no words that are contrary to Canada’s public policy.

The lawyer said he knows of no law that would prohibit a living person in Canada from giving money to the National Alliance.

John Hughes, the lawyer for the executor of the estate Fred Streed, argued that the application to prevent the disposition of McCorkill’s estate to the National Alliance should be dismissed.

Isabelle McCorkill didn’t attend the trial in Saint John nor did any representative from the National Alliance, a West-Virginia based organization.

Chiasson, her lawyer, has said that the legal battle over her brother’s estate has never been about the money, but rather, about preventing it from going to a neo-Nazi group.

Catherine Fawcett, who represents the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada, also argued that the gift to the National Alliance is “completely against public policy” and pointed to the connection between hate propaganda and violence.

McCorkill’s estate includes, among other items, a collection of hundreds of Greek, Roman, and Italian coins – some dating back to 525 BC – that he amassed since the 1970s. Some items were once displayed at the University of Saskatchewan’s Antiquities Museum and a release from that institution in 1997 described him as a well-travelled collector and a chemist who spent time at MIT and the Smithsonian Institution.

Little else is known about the man or why he lived in Saint John, where he moved about a year before his death. He lived quietly in a townhouse in Millidgeville and after he died at home in 2004, his body remained at the Saint John Regional Hospital for nearly two weeks while the authorities tried to track down his next of kin.

The National Alliance paid for his funeral and hired Malcolm Ross and William Ross of Moncton to transport, store and take inventory of his assets.

Malcolm Ross, who attended McCorkill’s court hearing in Saint John on Tuesday with his brother, was the focus of a 1996 Supreme Court ruling that found that the former Moncton-area teacher whose off-duty writings claimed Christians were under attack by an international Jewish conspiracy, had in fact “poisoned” the educational environment. The ruling upheld a human rights board of inquiry that ordered Ross into a non-teaching job.

Outside court, he told the Telegraph-Journal that he was there to “observe,” but declined to comment on his connection to the McCorkill matter.

Hear Paul Fromm on the Don Black Show at 10:00 a.m. Friday, January 24 Discussing the SPLC’s Efforts to Hijack the McCorkill Will

Posted on by

Hear Paul Fromm on the Don Black Show at 10:00 a.m. Friday, January 24 Discussing the SPLC’s Efforts to Hijack the McCorkill Will

http://www.renseradio.com/listenlive.htm

They can find the archives from there.

The announcement thread on the public side of Stormfront is here:

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1017362/

Listen live weekdays 9:00-11:00am ET

to Stormfront with DonBlack & Truck Roy
on the Rense satellite/radio network.

You can also listen live to any show by calling
712-432-7855 from any phone.

Stormfront radio show with host Don Black
back on the air tomorrow!

 The Don and Derek Black Show went on the air on WPBR 1340AM four years ago. We broadcast five days a week for three years, despite considerable expense and relentless threats against the station by our enemies.

Don Black and his long-time co-host Truck Roy are now back, with a bigger audience than ever! We have partnered with the Rense Internet/Satellite network for a live two-hour show, every weekday morning, 9:00-11:00 Eastern Time. This is just before the David Duke Show at 11:00.

Don Black has been an activist fighting for European-American survival for forty-five years, beginning when he was fifteen years old. After many difficult years working to reach our people with the truth of racial realities, he was first to realize the potential of the Internet.

He first started promoting our message on various online services in 1988, before most people had ever heard of the Internet. He then set up a small dial-up computer bulletin board called Stormfront in 1990, while working on the David Duke for US Senate Campaign. This would later go online on the Net.

But it wasn’t until March of 1995 that Stormfront’s reach exploded, when the World Wide Web had made navigating the Net easier for non-techies.

For the first time, we had our own media. And in the years since, with the media monopoly’s control of news broken, more of our people than ever before now understand the truth. But we have a long way to go.

Join Don Black and Truck Roy, with special guest Gordon Lee Baum, CEO of the largest pro-White organization in America, the Council of Conservative Citizens, talk about where we’ve been and where we’re going. Call-ins welcome.

Tune in live here Monday-Friday, 9:00-11:00am Eastern Time. Archives will be available shortly after each show.

Or you can listen to the show live by calling 712-432-7855 from any phone.

If you would like to participate, our toll free call-in number is 877-342-6673