Israeli Partisans Use Name Calling To Squelch Free Speech

Original source:

“Anti-Zionism” is now being equated to “Anti-Semitism” by Israeli partisans as well by the U.S. State Department. A recent international campaign orchestrated by four Zionist organizations, including the ADL, tried to prevent Alison Weir of If Americans Knew from speaking on the subject,  “Uncovered, Israel’s Occupation of Palestine,” (link to talk) at a community college in Fresno, CA by accusing her of being an “Anti-Semite.” Local sponsor GV Wire did not back down and said they believed in free speech and would even sponsor another event featuring a supporter of Israel. The event went off with no protesters present as promised by the Israeli partisans. Fresno members of We Hold These Truths were there to support Alison Weir with signs like “No More Wars For Israel.” Ms. Weir remarked that the campaign to stop her from speaking was the most intense that she has witnessed to date.  This 21-minute podcast reveals some interesting insights into the event and her attackers who appear to be becoming desperate in their attempts to prevent the truth of the Israeli occupation from being broadcast.

How to Get Booted From Your Church

The other day I was looking for famous quotes about “free expression” or “free speech.” This one popped out:  “To prohibit free speech is the first act of terrorism.” I discovered it was written by Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677).

I thought “terrorism” had been a new word coined by George Bush (well, not really). So I did a quick search about Spinoza, and here’s what I found. He was a Dutch philosopher born into the Jewish religion. But he was a deep thinker, and said a few things about his birth-religion that the rabbis didn’t quite like. He even hobnobbed a bit with Mennonites back then.

For example, Spinoza didn’t believe in the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob. He no doubt felt that killing in God’s name wasn’t quite the right thing to do.

His ideas got him into some trouble. Well, quite a bit of trouble. So much trouble that his religious leaders decided to boot him from their church. Now, here’s where it gets real interesting, when you read some of the excommunication benefits served to Spinoza from his ‘compassionate’ religious leaders. Remember, Spinoza was only 23 years old when he got booted from his religion by the sages.

How would you deal with a good-bye like this?

The Lords of the ma’amad, having long known of the evil opinions and acts of Baruch de Espinoza, have endeavoured by various means and promises, to turn him from his evil ways. But having failed to make him mend his wicked ways, and, on the contrary, daily receiving more and more serious information about the abominable heresies which he practised and taught and about his monstrous deeds, and having for this numerous trustworthy witnesses who have deposed and born witness to this effect in the presence of the said Espinoza, they became convinced of the truth of the matter; and after all of this has been investigated in the presence of the honourable chachamin [sages], they have decided, with their consent, that the said Espinoza should be excommunicated and expelled from the people of Israel. By the decree of the angels, and by the command of the holy men, we excommunicate, expel, curse and damn Baruch de Espinoza, with the consent of God, Blessed be He, and with the consent of all the Holy Congregation, in front of these holy Scrolls with the six-hundred-and-thirteen precepts which are written therein, with the excommunication with which Joshua banned Jericho, with the curse with which Elisha cursed the boys, and with all the curses which are written in the Book of the Law. Cursed be he by day and cursed be he by night; cursed be he when he lies down, and cursed be he when he rises up; cursed be he when he goes out, and cursed be he when he comes in. The Lord will not spare him; the anger and wrath of the Lord will rage against this man, and bring upon him all the curses which are written in this book, and the Lord will blot out his name from under heaven, and the Lord will separate him to his injury from all the tribes of Israel with all the curses of the covenant, which are written in the Book of the Law. But you who cleave unto the Lord God are all alive this day. We order that no one should communicate with him orally or in writing, or show him any favour, or stay with him under the same roof, or within four ells of him, or read anything composed or written by him.

Although Talmudic texts say Spinoza probably never became a Christian, he probably did get tired of the Talmud for saying things like:

 

The Trial of Arthur Topham continues on Remembrance Day

Dear Readers,

Yesterday, Tuesday November 10, 2015 was a day marked by many long delays which prevented Justice Butler from charging the jury until 4:00 pm.

Once the jury was given their instructions they retired to deliberate and remained sequestered (and will remain sequestered) until such time as they come to a decision.

They stopped last night at 9:00 pm and will resume deliberating this morning again.

It is expected (by me) that they will come to a decision today. Here in Canada November 11 (aka 11-11) is a national holiday called Remembrance Day in honour of all those Canadians who died in all the wars and conflicts throughout the 20th century.

Today, therefore, would be a fitting occasion for the jury to pronounce a verdict of NOT GUILTY in my case. It would signal a new beginning where all Canadians will have the right and freedom to express their opinions and beliefs without fear of government censorship. It was for this basic freedom that so many believed in that they gave their lives to protect it.

God grant that those 12 women and men will see the wisdom of doing what is right to protect and carry on this sacred, democratic right.

Sincerely,

Arthur Topham

RadicalPress.com

Finally, A Legal Organization Defends Free Speech In Canada For Persecuted Christian Editor

Please Support the OCLA Petition in Defence of Arthur Topham by RadicalPress.com

 

Dear OCLA Supporter,

Please take a moment to read and consider signing OCLA’s petition in defence of the civil rights of Arthur Topham, a BC man who is currently being prosecuted under a “Hate Propaganda” section of Canada’s Criminal Code. The petition is online at the following link: http://www.change.org/p/hon-suzanne-anton-attorney-general-of-bc-jag-minister-gov-bc-ca-hon-suzanne-anton-retract-your-consent-for-the-criminal-proceedings-against-mr-arthur-topham?utm_source=guides&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=petition_created

OCLA has the position that sections 318 to 320 of the Criminal Code should be repealed. These sections allow egregious violations of the civil rights of liberty, just process, and freedom of expression. Under these provisions, a person can be jailed without the Crown being required to prove any actual harm to a single identified individual.

Mr. Topham was arrested in front of his spouse, detained, subjected to a home-invasive seizure, and faces jail time if convicted, for expressing his highly unpopular views.

OCLA’s public statement on this matter is available at: http://ocla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/OCLA-statement-re-Arthur-Topham.pdf

Please read OCLA’s letter to the BC Attorney General asking her to withdraw her consent for this prosecution, which is available at: http://ocla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/2014-09-24-Letter-OCLA-to-AG-of-BC.pdf

 

Yours truly,

 

Joseph Hickey
Executive Director

Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) http://ocla.ca

613-252-6148 (c)

joseph.hickey@ocla.ca

“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” – Voltaire

•••

QUOTE OF A COMMENT ON THE OCLA PETITION

“The belief that ideas are a prerogative of any self-chosen element of society is repugnant, intellectually and morally indefensible and insulting to any citizen who has both the right and responsibility to consider all available evidence, pro or con, on any issue of possible public concern or interest. The crucially important issue is that all citizens must be free to communicate their views and the right of all citizens to do so must be assured. Anti-”Hate” legislation is a transparent political measure meant to serve the interests of its sponsors who obviously are willing to employ almost any form of sophistry, cajoling, deception and intimidation to achieve the suppression of views which they do not like. Each citizen must be accorded the elementary respect as being sufficiently intelligent to assess the validity or otherwise of expressed views. Many of these issues have been debated by seers and saints from time immemorial and the debate certainly does not belong in a criminal court but rather in the court of informed public assessment. Informed assessments can only be made in light of full disclosure of evidence – on every ongoing process in the affairs of mankind. State suppression of ideas is a clear and inevitable route to tyranny and people who support such repression are a threat to civilization. I think that I am sufficiently intelligent and knowledgeable to hear an idea and accept, reject or consider it without any “assistance” from the State or those who exercise influence upon and behind the State apparatus. Anti-”Hate” (which can mean almost anything depending upon one’s perspective) legislation is an affront to the intelligence and integrity of every citizen and a violation of the historic assumption that truth is paramount and can only be found by diligent and unimpeded individual enquiry. The motives of persons or groups which attempt to suppress comment or criticism are patently suspect and transparent and such conduct does not go unnoticed or help their cause in the court of public opinion. By all means, do stay proceedings in this case and do not initiate them in any comparable situations. I do not need to be told what to think.” – Wallace Klinck

Christian blogger forced to shut down in Canada

Canadian conservative website shuts down after losing defamation suit, owners plan appeal

by Colin Kerr

• Mon Feb 03, 2014 18:49 EST

February 3, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The conservative website Free Dominion is shutting down after a libel suit was successfully concluded against its owners.

The plaintiff, Richard Warman, is an active human rights lawyer who has been involved in several high-profile cases heard by Canada’s human rights tribunals and in defamation suits on his own behalf in the Ontario Superior Court, notably against the National Post and Ezra Levant.

A screen grab from FreeDominion.ca.

The jury in the Free Dominion case ruled in October that the website’s owners, Mark and Connie Fournier, and two other defendants had committed defamation against Mr. Warman, and “acted in a manner that was highhanded and oppressive towards” him, the ruling stated.

The judge who reviewed the case for the purposes of assessing the issue of legal expenses affirmed the jury’s October decision, stating that the defendants “wrote postings to the political message board disparaging the plaintiff on many occasions. … The jury found that the defendants had acted with malice towards Mr. Warman and, as a result, awarded aggravated damages in the amount of $9,000.00 and also awarded $18,000.00 in punitive damages.”

On January 23^rd, Ontario Superior Court Justice, Robert Smith added to this fine an additional sum of $80,000 for Mr. Warman’s legal costs. The sum was divided up according to a formula determined by the judge between the four defendants, with the largest share levelled against the owners of the site.

In addition to the approximately $107,000 fine, an injunction was issued against the site to “never publish, or allow to be published, anything negative about Richard Warman,” according to the Fourniers.

“This means we are barred for life from ever operating a public forum or a blog (even about cookie recipes) where the public can comment,” the Fourniers state.

“If we do so, any one of Warman’s handful of supporters could, and probably would, use a common proxy server to avoid being traced, plant a negative comment about Warman on our site, and we would both be charged with contempt of court. If that happened –unlike in the Ottawa courtroom where we were blocked at every turn from presenting a defense– we actually would have no defense. We would both go to jail.”

“As of today, January 23, 2014, and after 13 years online, Free Dominion is closing its doors to the public. We have been successfully censored.”

The verdict in the Fournier-Warman case is particularly interesting in light of the repeal of section 13 of Canada’s Human Rights Act by Parliament on June 26^th of last year. Conservative thinkers had widely blamed the provision for being used as a political weapon by the Left to silence their opponents. No doubt many of these critics would include Warman himself among those having done so.

Warman’s career has been tied to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, for whom he worked from 2002 to 2004, and was himself criticized for “posing as a neo-Nazi in order to suss out the names and addresses of his targets, in a strategy that verged on entrapment,” the National Post reported. Edward Peter Lustig, a member of the CHRC, referred to Warman’s actions as “disappointing and disturbing.”

Section 13 had banned “any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” if the person or persons affected are “identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.”

In an audio message given on the Fourniers’ donation site, Connie says, “There is something wrong in a free country where negative comments about a government employee can land you in prison. … It is a precedent that endangers every single Canadian who allows comments on their forum or blog. Defamation law is wrong and outdated.”

The Fourniers plan to appeal the ruling, and consider that, if it is allowed to stand, the ruling will have a chilling effect on web-based political commentary in this country.

In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com, Ezra Levant, who has himself been at the centre of the free-speech controversy, said that, “Lawfare—that is, costly nuisance suits—is an increasingly common tactic of the political left in Canada. It’s not just against websites.”

“It’s evident that since Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act was repealed, Richard Warman has shifted his campaign of ‘lawfare’ to other legal venues, including defamation actions.”

Priest Hails Free Speech Warrior Doug Christie as a “Saint”

 

Thanks to radicalpress.com

 

http://blog.freedomsite.org/2013/03/priest-hails-free-speech-warrior-doug.html

 

 

VICTORIA. March 15, 2013. “Today we are laying a saint to rest,” proclaimed Fr. Lucien Larre, who said the funeral Mass this foggy morning for Doug Christie, Canada’s foremost free speech lawyer.” He fought for what was right,” said Order of Canada winner and psychologist Fr. Larre, “no matter the threats to his life or the number of times his office windows were broken. He stood tall.”

 

  

 

 

 

Twice in three days, Canadians have buried a taller than life man, known for his cowboy boots and black hat. Folks crowded a Peterborough hockey arena, March 13, to say farewell to Country and Western icon Stompin’ Tom Connors, the boy from Skinner’s Cove, PEI, who gave us songs like  Sudbury Saturday Night, Bud the Spud, My Stompin’  Grounds, that celebrated Canada.

      

 

Today in Victoria, a Western Canadian who struggled for more than 30 years to uphold another Canadian value, freedom of speech, even for people vilified by the press for their unpopular views, was buried. Doug Christie, a proud Scotsman, would have smiled as a lean piper piped his casket into a crowded St. Andrew’s Cathedral in downtown Victoria. A large bouquet of vivid red roses and Mr. Christie’s black Australian outback hat graced the top of the casket.

 

Fr. Larre hailed Doug Christie as “a real Westerner, a man with ideals and aspirations as high as the Rockies. He stood for a better Canada, a freer Canada,” the priest told the packed cathedral made up of mourners who had been Mr. Christie’s family, friends, clients, neighbours, and, in several cases, the beneficiaries of his kindness.

 

 

Father Lucien Larre

 

The Battling Barrister ” had the ideals our soldiers died for — for freedom — but we do not have certain freedoms, like freedom of speech, in Canada today,” said Fr. Larre, who returned his Order of Canada honour  in protest when the same honour was bestowed some years ago on mass abortionist Henry Morgenthaler. “What mattered to Doug Christie is a man’s right to speak. He believed people have the right to go to court whether they can afford it or not,” he added.

 

In a stirring eulogy to his father, Caderyn Christie, a second year law student, shared memories of a complex man — the battling lawyer so well known to the public, the politician, the devoted father, the private man with a wicked sense of fun and humour.

 

“A man like my dad was not meant to die in a hospital bed but on a battlefield with a sword and shield,” he said. And Doug Christie very nearly did die in the battle ground of the courtroom. For days during a three week trial in Victoria, Mr. Christie had been in mounting pain, fighting nausea and sleeplessness, but refusing painkillers lest they dull his wits. Finally, on Thursday, February 21, he was too ill to finish his summation and was rushed to hospital and diagnosed with advanced terminal liver cancer.

 

One of Doug Christie’s heroes was Confederate General Robert E. Lee whose portrait hung in his office. Lee advised: “Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less.”

 

Doug Christie took this to heart and was driven by a sense of duty.

 

Caderyn revealed that Doug often recalled growing up in Winnipeg and that there was always food on the table but just enough. Doug paid his way through the University of Winnipeg working on the railway and as a lifeguard at Banff Hotsprings. For a while he lived in a top floor garret that was scorching in the summer and leaked snow and rain in the frigid Winnipeg winter. Other part-time work paid Doug’s way through law school at the University of British Columbia. Doug’s single-minded goal was to practise law.

 

He was part way through articling for a Victoria firm when an accidental error in judgement angered a prominent client and the law firm let Doug go. He was in near despair seeing his career stymied before it even began, his son recalled. Then, a single practitioner in Victoria, Barney Russ, gave the Winnipeg law student a break and took him on as an articling student. Nine months later, Doug was called to the bar and began a 42-year career in law.

 

Years later, Doug Christie visited Barney Russ who was dying of cancer. Doug asked what he could ever do to thank or repay Mr. Russ for having given him a chance. “Pass it on,” he gasped with laboured breathing.

 

That had become a driving force in Doug’s life, his son recalled: “He chose to defend people who would otherwise be unrepresented and he paid dearly in his personal and professional life.” Although he had struggled hard to become a lawyer and succeeded, “he was very frugal with himself.”

 

Caderyn Christie said his father was “profoundly kind to his children. He was also a proud Scotsman and taught us kids how to pull the nails out of a 2′ x 4″ and reuse them.” And, yet, Doug would treat a man who was a regular panhandler at the church doors to a lunch once a month. He didn’t just toss him a looney as he walked by.

 

Caderyn concluded his eulogy with words that left many an eye wet: “Robert Louis Stevenson said: ‘A leader is one who keeps his fears to himself and shows his courage to others.’ That was my father. He lived fully, he lived freely and laughed every chance he got.”

 

In his closing remarks, commenting on Doug Christie’s ever present cowboy boots, celebrant priest Fr. Larre quoted a line from Country and Western singer George Jones song Who’s Going to Fill Those Shoes? “We must get together for free speech and try to fill those shoes,” he urged. — Paul Fromm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leaders of Canada’s free speech movement at the reception at Doug Christie’s funeral in Victoria, BC., March 15, 2013: Dave “The Unlicensed Man” Lindsay; Paul Fromm, Director Canadian Association for Free Expression; expert witness on Internet and computer technology, Bernard Klatt; and Marc Lemire, webmaster of the Freedomsite, the only victim to win under Canada’s notorious Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (Internet censorship).

 

 

Cross-posted to:

 

·       http://blog.freedomsite.org/2013/03/priest-hails-free-speech-warrior-doug.html

·       http://canadianhumanrightscommission.blogspot.ca/2013/03/priest-hails-free-speech-warrior-doug.html

Two steps to make world a better place, says Canada’s free speech lawyer

With 40 years of battling in the courts, Canada’s most famous free speech lawyer suggests how you personally can make a difference in this unfree world controlled by the elite at the top.

In another inspirational and instructive message, Argentinian economist Adrian Salbuchi discusses “personal sovereignty” which must be exercised before we can be freed from the monster grip of the NWO elite.

Fools for God: anti-Zionist Christian preachers

[MW note: Michael Hoffman shows how anti-Zionist Christian preachers fall into the trap of promoting Talmudic Judaism.]

http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2010/07/subverting-bill-of-rights-with-elena.html

Subverting the Bill of Rights with Elena Kagan, Rabbi Lerner and Prof. Peller

The move to abolish America’s legal universalism (the same law applies to all)

“There can’t be free speech for everyone”

Legal universalism runs contrary to the Talmud

The so-called Network of Spiritual Progressives (NSP) is led by Rabbi Michael Lerner. At a June NSP “Strategy Development Conference” in Washington, D.C. the group worked out the details of their plan to overthrow the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights by converting the U.S. legal system to one “based on empathy—for each person, depending on their circumstances — as opposed to one based on a rule of law that values equal protection for all.”

The movement is accompanied by a lot of righteous rhetoric against corporate take-overs and peace activism, but it appears to be little more than a front for a Leftist-Talmudic (pillar of chesed) political counterpart to Right-wing Talmudic (pillar of gevurah) neocon politics.

Gentile Right wingers typically take this charade at face value and jump into the fray against Talmudic Leftists on behalf of Talmudic Rightists. Consequently, we have the amusing spectacle of Right wing anti-Zionist Christian preachers denouncing “liberal Jews” while allying with pillar of gevurah rabbis such as Daniel Lapin. Meanwhile gentile Leftists ally with pillar of chesed Rabbi Michael Lerner against Lapin. Of course both pillars support Judaism.

Siding with one covert pillar of Judaism against the other is an ancient streak of self-defeating myopia among Right wing goyim, some of whom fancy themselves as experts on the religion of Judaism.

Gary Peller, a Constitutional law professor at Jesuit Georgetown University spoke at Rabbi Lerner’s Network of Spiritual Progressives conference. In his speech he denounced the concept of neutrality before the law as a “sham ideology.” Prof. Peller argues for special privileges for special groups. For example, Peller castigated a 1977 Supreme Court ruling that  refused to obstruct a neo-Nazi march in Skokie, Illinois, which was home to a large population of Judaic “survivors of the Holocaust.”

In the Skokie case Prof. Peller believes the holiness of the saintly “Holocaust survivors” trumped the rights of the  neo-Nazis. Peller’s legal theory demolishes the most precious aspect of the First Amendment — protection of the freedom of speech of society’s most despised outsiders.

Peller argues for a two-tier Talmudic legal standard: “There can’t be free speech for everyone if you have taken away the right of Holocaust survivors to come out that day…unless you think it must come at the cost of severe emotional distress.” For that reason, he said, “any just legal system must look at the effect of law on people.”

The June conference also featured a “Shabbat Service and Torah Study with Rabbi Debora Kohn and Rabbi Michael Lerner.”

The Network of Spiritual Progressives organization firmly believes that future Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan will be the key to substituting the kind of “empathy” which Georgetown U. Law Professor Peller advocates in place of our nation’s Bill of Rights protections.

The Network proposes Kagan as a counterweight to Antonin Scalia, a legal “conflict” that will draw hot reactions from partisans of both justices. The macabre joke that the partisans will surely miss is thatScalia is as gevurah Talmudic as Kagan is chesed Talmudic. Heads they win, tails we lose.

Copyright ©2010 by Michael Hoffman • www.revisionisthistory.org • All Rights Reserved