Hear Paul;Fromm “the Times They Are A-Changing” -October 7 Strips the Zionists of Their Most Favoured Victim Status
https://www.bitchute.com/video/qTj8ViKs1bZB
Vancouver, August 9, 2024
As you are all most likely aware, the Israel-Palestinian conflict has flared up again. Like clockwork, the apologists for both sides have come crawling out of the woodworks insisting that we all take sides. Interestingly, this time around the apologists on each side are taking rather the same position with regards to the apologists of the other side that they insist the side they are cheering for in the Middle East take towards the other side, i.e., one of eradication and elimination. The pro-Israel side is calling for the pro-Palestinian side to be silenced, their protests shut down, and their views criminalized. Some on the pro-Israel side are capable of distinguishing between being pro-Palestinian, that is to say, someone who seeks to promote the basic human rights of the Palestinian Arab population, and being a supporter of the murderous terrorist organization Hamas, but it seems to me that they are outnumbered by those lacking this capacity. To be fair, this same incapacity characterizes the other side as well. On either side, it is most ugly in its manifestation. The pro-Israelis who fail to make the distinction have come close to calling for all expressions of humanitarian concern for the Palestinians to be outlawed as hate. They clearly have come dangerously unhinged because all rational, sensible, and decent people are categorically opposed to laws criminalizing hate qua hate. The other side, however, has made it difficult not to sympathize with them to some degree in that they have been openly cheering on the most vile and despicable sorts of behaviour on the part of Hamas.
Two and a half years ago, in an essay entitled “The Holy Land Returns to the Old Normal” I gave an overview of the Israel-Palestine conflict, rebutted a few common fallacies concerning it, offered an explanation of where the insistence that we all take sides comes from, and answered that demand. I do not intend to go over all of that material again, but I hope you will excuse my quoting myself here. At the end of the essay I pointed out the obvious real nature of the relationship between the Israeli government and Hamas:
The most ill-kept secret of the Middle East is that Likud Israeli governments and Hamas each rely upon the other to maintain their popular support among their own people. The Palestinians expect Hamas to keep on harassing Israel. The Israelis expect their government to brutally punish the Palestinians. Each, therefore, provides the other with the excuse to do what they need to do to play to their own crowds. So we come to May of this year. On the sixth the Palestinians hold a protest in East Jerusalem, on the seventh the Israelis crack down and storm the al-Aqsa mosque, on the tenth Hamas issues an ultimatum which Israel naturally ignores and the rockets start flying, on the eleventh the Israeli Air Force begin several days of bombing the hell out of Gaza. On the twentieth, having given their fans the show they were looking for, Netanyahu and Hamas agree to a ceasefire. Bada bing, bada boom, it is all over in a fortnight, mission accomplished, everyone is happy, high fives all around. Too bad about all the people who had to die, but didn’t someone somewhere at sometime say something about an omelet and eggs?
There is no good reason to think that any of this has changed in the present situation. Indeed, the current conflagration could be said to exemplify the point. The actions of the Israeli government and Hamas both clearly serve the interests of the other. Consider Hamas’ attack on 7 October. On top of the usual barrage of rockets, Hamas breached Israel’s supposedly impenetrable barrier and almost 3000 of their agents entered Israel, attacked towns, kibbutzim (collective farms), and even a weekend music festival. They murdered some 1500 people, and took about 150 hostages. The murder victims and hostages were mostly Israeli citizens, although there were a few soldiers and a number of people from other countries who were in Israel in various capacities – workers, students, attendees of the music festival – among both the dead and hostages. This was far better organized and co-ordinated than any previous Hamas attack and consequently far more lethal but it is difficult to see how it accomplished anything for Hamas other than the bloodshed itself. It did, however, clearly serve a purpose of Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu, who had been ousted as Prime Minister of Israel in June of 2021, was re-elected in December of last year on a hard-line platform and needed to at least appear to be making good on his promises. Cracking down on Hamas is the easiest way of doing that and by carrying out an attack of this nature Hamas handed him an iron clad justification for doing so. On a side note, whatever else you might say about Benjamin Netanyahu, his political longevity is something to be marvelled at. I fully expect that sometime down the road we will be reading, a week or two after his funeral, that he has just won re-election as Prime Minister of Israel in a landslide.
Now some of you might be thinking “Aha, gotcha, there is a flaw in your argument. Hamas’s actions might serve Netanyahu’s ends, but in retaliating the Israeli government will wipe them out so there is no reciprocal benefit, it is a one-way street this time around”. This, however, very much remains to be seen. So far, apart from the rhetoric, Israel’s retaliatory actions have consisted of the same sort of aerial bombardment with which they have responded to past Hamas attacks, albeit on a larger scale. There has been talk of an imminent and massive ground incursion into Gaza for a week and a half now but if it ever materializes the IDF’s overwhelming military superiority does not guarantee Israel a quick and easy victory. Ask the Americans. Israel would be walking into the same sort of situation in which the United States found herself entangled in Vietnam and later Afghanistan. This is a long term operation and the longer it drags on the more it is to Hamas’ favour, because the longer such a conflict stretches out, the less international public sympathy will be with Israel, and it is in the arena of international public opinion that Hamas fights all its true battles.
It sounds crazy but it is nevertheless true that every time Hamas attacks Israel it is with the intention of provoking a retaliatory attack. The reason this seems crazy is because Israel is so much stronger than Hamas in terms of military might. It conjures up the picture of a chihuahua getting in the face of a big bruiser of a bull dog and yipping away annoyingly until the larger dog barks or bites its head off. One moral of the Old Testament account of David and Goliath, however, is that size isn’t everything. In this case, Hamas wants Israel to attack back because every time Israel does far more Palestinian civilians are killed than Hamas agents, enabling Hamas to run to the international news media, the General Assembly of the United Nations, the World Council of Churches, humanitarian organizations, university professors and student activists, and basically every group of self-important jackasses with a lot of money and power and not enough brain cells to fill a thimble, and whine and cry about how mean old Israel has been beating on them again, after which these groups wag their fingers in Israel’s face saying shame on you, shame on you, and dump tons of money in humanitarian relief into Hamas controlled Palestinian territory, keeping Hamas solvent, and freeing up other resources with which to buy more rockets.
A great illustration of the Hamas strategy can be found in the 1959 film The Mouse That Roared. In the movie, a small European country, the Duchy of Grand Fenwick, has built its entire economy on a single export product, the wine Pinot Grand Fenwick. When a California wine company produces a cheap knockoff, and the country is threatened with insolvency, Duchess Gloriana (Peter Sellers) and her Prime Minister, Count Mountjoy (Peter Sellers) hatch a scheme to attack the United States, lose, and then reap the rewards of losing to the United States, which pours plenty of money into rebuilding the countries it has defeated in war. So they send the United States a declaration of war and then put their game warden, Tully (guess who), in charge of their small army of soldiers, mail-clad and armed with bows and arrows, and send him over. The scheme goes awry when Tully accidentally wins the war – watch the movie to find out how. The point of course, is that Hamas’ strategy is essentially that of Grand Fenwick. It is a darker version that involves much more bloodshed including the sacrifice of large numbers of their own and the payoff is expected more from third parties than from the victorious attackee, but it is the same basic scam.
Israel is running a big scam too, of course. In her case it is not the gullible “international community” that is the mark so much as the equally gullible United States of America. Israel, which paid for the creation of Hamas – see my previous essay alluded to earlier – has long been the single largest recipient of American foreign aid, in part because the various pro-Israel lobby groups in the United States make the National Rifle Association look like rank amateurs in comparison, but also because Israel knows how to play on the United States’ national mythology by presenting herself as the only liberal democracy in her region, surrounded and besieged by anti-Semitic autocrats, just like those that the United States likes to imagine herself as having single-handedly defeated in the Second World War. Of course there is some truth in that depiction. When did you ever hear of a successful scam that consisted completely of falsehoods?
This is why it is best for the rest of the world to stay out of this conflict and refuse to give in to this demand that we pick sides. Our involvement, whichever side we end up supporting, however well-intentioned, ends up facilitating the worst sort of behaviour of both sides.
We need to stop looking at the conflict in the Middle East through the lens of the “good guys” versus “bad guys” dichotomy, rooted in the heresy of Mani that has permeated Western popular culture through the pernicious influence of Hollywood movies and the comic book industry. There are no “good guys” in this conflict although there are a lot of innocent victims, both Israeli and Palestinian Arab.
If someone were to point a gun to my head and demand that I choose sides I would chose Israel, although I would be sure to hold my nose while doing so. Israel is a legitimate state, or at least the closest thing to a legitimate state that a modern democratic government without a king can be, which isn’t very close. Hamas is a criminal organization of lawless thugs and murderers. Israel has spent the last three quarters of a century trying to build up a civilized society for herself and her people. Hamas are destroyers not builders. I am a life-long Tory by instinct and as the late Sir Roger Scruton wisely put it “Conservatism starts from a sentiment that all mature people can readily share: the sentiment that good things are easily destroyed, but not easily created.” I will never side with those who only ever walk the easy path of destroying what others have labouriously built. Not Year Zero, Cultural Maoist, groups like Black Lives Matter and Every Child Matters in North America. Not Hamas in the Middle East. Finally, while both sides value the lives of civilians on the other side extremely cheap, there is a huge difference in that Hamas places no higher a value on the lives of their own civilians. Indeed, Hamas arguably values the lives of civilian Palestinian Arabs less than Israel. Hamas, when it attacks Israel, targets the civilian population, but prior to 7 October, its attacks have been largely ineffective. It fires tons of rockets at Israel, almost all of which are taken down by the Iron Dome, and the few that make it past are not guaranteed to hit anything or anyone. Its rocket launchers, however, Hamas deliberately places in residential neighbourhoods, mosques, hospitals, schools, and other similar locations where a retaliatory strike to take out the rocket launcher will have maximum civilian casualties. The same is true of anything else Hamas has that would be considered a legitimate military target by the rules that most countries, nominally at least, support for the conduct of warfare. Therefore, Israel must either stand there and allow herself to be attacked, the sort of thing someone whose soul has been killed and brain rotted from training in public relations and/or human resources might recommend, (1) or take out Hamas’ attack bases and in the process destroy the civilian and humanitarian infrastructure within which those bases are hid and kill the countless numbers of Palestinians that Hamas uses as human shields, handing Hamas plenty of ammunition in the form of bad press to use against her..
That having been said, the reasons for refusing the choice, for not taking sides are solid. It is in the mutual interests of Israel and Hamas to keep this conflict going forever, but this is not in the interests of the civilians on both sides, nor is it in the interests of the rest of the world which both sides expect to pay for their lethal and destructive activities. It is in the best interests of everybody, that the rest of the world refuse to be dragged into this any longer, and tell the two sides they both need to grow up.
I shall, Lord willing, follow up this essay with two others. The first will demonstrate that the Christian Zionist position that we are required by the Scriptures to take Israel’s side in Middle-East conflicts is rank heresy. The second will look at the neoconservative claim that the pro-Palestinian Left’s unhinged support of Hamas comes from anti-Semitism and demonstrate that it comes from a different source.
(1) Contrary to what the Anabaptist heresy teaches, Jesus said nothing of this sort in Matthew 5:39. This verse is best understood as forbidding revenge rather than self-defence but even if taken as forbidding self-defence it says nothing about how governments, responsible for the security of those they govern, are to act, as evident from the fact that before this section of the Sermon, Jesus gave a disclaimer that it is not to be taken as abrogating the Law. — Gerry T. Neal
Lucky She’s Not White — Calgary Black Lives Matter President Won’t Be Charged With Hate Motivated Mischief for Blocking Access to Catholic School
Canada’s notorious “hate law”, Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code, was introduced by Pierre Elliott Trudeau in 1971, after more than 30 years of pressure from the lobbyist group, the Canadian Jewish Congress. In the 1990s, Bill C-36 made “hate” against certain privileged groups an aggravating factor in sentencing. These laws were always meant to be used against White people and Christians. They were imposed to suppress or dampen White dissent against the Globalist totalitarian changes being imposed on our society. They have almost NEVER been used against non-Whites.
Thus, when earlier this week, it was announced that Adora Nwofor President of Calgary Black Lives Matter was being charged with mischief for blocking access to St. Thomas Aquinas School and that her actions were motivated “by hate based on race or ethnic origin” I was amazed.
Sure enough, the Big Boys must have spoken to Prosecutor Will Tran. Such charges are only reserved for White people. Obstreperous Negroes get a pass. ” Prosecutor Will Tran told Justice Indra Maharaj the Crown would not be proceeding with the allegation Nwofor committed a hate-based mischief by interfering with people’s access to St. Thomas Aquinas School.” — Paul Fromm
The Calgary Police Service said there was a “clerical error” in alleging Adora Nwofor was motivated by “hate based on race or ethnic origin” Author of the article: Kevin Martin Published Jun 16, 2023 • Last updated 1 day ago • 2 minute read 94 Comments
The hate-crime charge against Calgary Black Lives Matter president Adora Nwofor was dropped by the Crown Friday, two weeks after she was arrested by police.
Prosecutor Will Tran told Justice Indra Maharaj the Crown would not be proceeding with the allegation Nwofor committed a hate-based mischief by interfering with people’s access to St. Thomas Aquinas School.
“There’s just one matter before the court. It’s the Crown’s application to withdraw it,” Tran told Maharaj, about the single allegation against Nwofor.
Outside court, Tran declined comment, which is standard procedure for prosecutors where charges are withdrawn, stayed or downgraded.
But in an official statement the Alberta Crown Prosecution Service (ACPS) indicated the allegation wasn’t reviewed by a prosecutor prior to Nwofor being charged.
“The ACPS is working to roll out a pre-charge process provincewide, but Calgary is not currently a participant in this process,” the statement said.
“With the pre-charge process, the prosecutor would have reviewed the potential charge prior to it being laid. The prosecutor would then provide this assessment to law enforcement to consider prior to laying charges,” it said.
Soviet Russia Invented “Hate Laws” Which Their Fellow Traveller Dutifully Copied in Canada & Much of Europe
First the Apology. For ten years of harassment, invasion and intrusion, and a giant legal battle. All for telling the truth. In a world where truth and lies are inverted, in a world where everything is turned upside-down, your truth-telling has been deemed a crime.
Now the Thank You. Your principled and valiant truth-telling , unwavering in the face of huge obstacles, has been momentous! You have enlightened and inspired untold many of us. The ripple effect of your work will grow into a tsunami of Light and Truth.
Great Truth Teller Silenced, but Message is Unstoppable
Arthur Topham of Quesnel B.C. has been sentenced to silence for now, after a 10 year legal battle. His crime is that he fearlessly wrote about the state of the world in his online website RadicalPress.com, and that was just too much for the Zionist Powers to bear.
Those who feel threatened by a peaceful man expressing his views online are obviously very nervous and afraid. If there was nothing to hide and if these online publishings were so erroneous as they would like us to believe, this group would not feel threatened. Arthur Topham would simply be ignored. The reaction alone should be enough to trigger people to question: what is it that is so taboo to say?
Trying to stop the truth from coming out is as futile as if you were trying to drink the lake dry to prevent drowning in it. Even the modern-day book burnings cannot succeed in vaporizing the truth. The truth is emerging at an exponential rate, and these desparate attempts by the Powers-That-Be to silence truth-tellers are a show of their panic.
DANGER? FOR WHOM?
Harry Abrams and Richard Warman are the two men who initiated the legal assault against Arthur Topham. Those are their names. Arthur was not allowed to ever mention their names during those years of legal battle because somehow they feared it might bring danger to their lives. Now what about the danger they posed to Arthur, endlessly defaming him?!
In a trial by jury in October-November 2015, Arthur Topham was found guilty on one count and not guilty on another count of exactly the same charge, namely, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, willfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group, people of the Jewish religion or ethnic origin, contrary to section 319(2) of Criminal Code of Canada. The identical two charges were for different time periods.
In the Canadian court of law, the burden of proof switches to the defense to affirm that there was no ‘hate’ under CCC section 319(2). The prosecution need not produce victims of the alleged hatred. What is ‘hate’ but an emotion? How does anybody know what is in someone else’s head?
One of the defenses is 319(2)(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true. Again, how can anyone prove that Arthur Topham did not believe what he was writing? Are they mind-readers?
For an interesting commentary of the extraordinary trial and background, please see this article by Eve Mykytin. She is an American lawyer who attended the second week of the trial. She covers, for example, the story of Len Rudner who was established as an expert witness for the Crown. His written expert opinion was identical to the written expert opinion submitted by Bernie Farber who was originally supposed to be the Crown’s expert witness. (Farber pulled out of his commitment when he learned that he would not be permitted to appear via video-link.) Yet Len Rudner told the court that he himself was the author of his “expert opinion”. Rudner also had tried to have Arthur Topham’s website shut down before the trial. Conflict of interest, is it not? Still, he was permitted to be an expert witness. Very strange, to say the least.
Arthur’s Crime
It can be fairly assumed that Arthur Topham’s parody on the infamous book Germany Must Perish was the item which caused the jury to give a guilty verdict, as the publishing of that parody fell within the “guilty” time period. Germany Must Perish was written in 1941 by an American Jew named Theodore Kaufman, and it was generally praised and promoted at that time by the mainstream media (MSM).
The sheer monstrosity of the book is breathtaking, and even more shocking is the fact that it was not condemned when it appeared in 1941. Theodore Kaufman concocted a sick plan to annihilate the German people, the stated goal being that Germany must perish. The plan was to hire thousands of surgeons to sterilize all German men of reproductive age, and voilà, no more Germans. Gone Forever.
The hateful book was subsequently almost forgotten, until Arthur Topham found a provocative way to bring attention to the hideousness of that genocidal text. He reproduced portions of the book word for word, except that he replaced “Germany” with “Israel” and “Germans” with “Jews”. Germany Must Perish became Israel Must Perish, and so on. The two texts, original and parody, appeared side by side on his website.
In a trick of Orwellian Doublespeak, B’nai Brith Canada now tells the world that Arthur Topham called for Jews to be forcibly sterilized. No context, nothing. It is crazy making! It is just another glaring example of how B’nai Brith and the MSM engage in deliberate deception to turn reality 100% on its head. Unless someone has been following the case very closely, the uninformed general public has no reason to doubt the story they are told about how Arthur Topham called for sterilization of the Jews. People cannot even check for themselves, because the website has been taken down, as part of sentencing.
In these times of universal deceipt, the messenger who seeks to warn us about the villain, is himself labelled the villain.
Perhaps the members of the jury did not understand the meaning of satire or parody. Or perhaps the convoluted court proceedings or the instructions given by the judge curtailed their ability to perceive it this way. The jury members are also not immune to the mind-contaminating effects of all the toxic lies and atrocity propaganda we have been subjected to since birth. We have been programmed to respond in specific ways to certain words, these words being the number one weapon in the psychological warfare being conducted on us without most of us realizing it.
Judge Admits There Was No Incitement
He does not call for violence; his views were political satire. It is not his intent to indirectly incite violence.
~ the judge said during the sentencing proceedings.
By these words, does the judge basically exonerate Arthur Topham? Methinks so.
Topham told the court,
I felt that I had a duty as a Canadian citizen to alert the general public of an imminent threat… the interests of the Jewish lobby.
He also expressed gratitude that his concerns had been brought to the record.
B’Nai B’rith Very Disappointed
From the Times of Israel article: B’nai B’rith was not satisfied with the sentence, tweeting that it “is very disappointed by lenient sentence for Arthur Topham, convicted of promoting #antisemitism.”
The CEO of B’nai Brith Canada, Michael Mostyn, said that
the timing is especially disturbing, as Canada’s Jewish community reels from a series of bomb threats against our community centers, inspired by the same hateful ideology that drives Mr. Topham. [He] is a committed and unrepentant Jew-hater, who persisted in publishing lurid anti-Semitic content on his website throughout this legal process. Canada’s laissez-faire approach to hate crimes continues to fail minority groups and puts them at increased risk of attacks against their lives or property.
This is interesting in light of the news that an American-Israeli Jewish teen has just been arrested in connection with a series of bomb threats against Jewish institutions on several continents. Good timing Mr. Mostyn, very disturbing indeed.
Canada’s Hate Speech Laws – Who Do They Serve?
Well said Arthur! If some things are not permitted to be said, then we do not have freedom of speech. Period.
I have heard seemingly intelligent people repeat the mantra which has been programmed into their heads “but hate speech is not the same as free speech”! I say to them, who determines what “hate” speech is? Who controls the Mass Media? Who controls Hollywood? Who controls our law-makers?
Truth is Hate to those who Hate the Truth.
To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize. ~ Voltaire
THANK YOU ARTHUR TOPHAM for your service to humanity! Enjoy the imposed quiet time. The torch is being passed forward. There are countless torch carriers.
Mehr Licht!
Paul Fromm is the Director of the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee. He points out that sentences are stronger for hate against minorities but not for hate against white people. This is bias against whites. This case was a judgement by Judge Harry van Harten.
Brad Love in Fort McMurray