Support Free Speach

[Cliffy]

Write a Letter for Freedom of Speech!



By Arthur Topham
March 1, 2009

Dear Free Speech Lover,

I, Arthur Topham and my website The Radical Press are in the midst of a legal battle with the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada over the issue of freedom of speech.

On November 20, 2007 I received confirmation from the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) that the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada (BBC) and its British Columbia representative, Harry Abrams, had co-joined to file a “complaint” with the CHRC on August 14, 2007 citing the infamous “Section 13” of the Canadian Human Rights Act, a specious and vague piece of legislation which states:

13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination. [bold mine]

As this legislation was not all-inclusive enough for the “entrapment” purposes which the Zionist lobbies had in mind, immediately following the 9/11 attack and Canada’s hastily formulated Anti-terrorism Act, c.41 (passed December 18th, 2001) they were able to successfully lobby for the additional inclusion into Sec. 13(1) of the following “Interpretation(2)” which reads:

Interpretation
(2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies in respect of a matter that is communicated by means of a computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication, but does not apply in respect of a matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking. [bold mine]

This Interpretation(2) of Sec. 13(1) was precisely what the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress were waiting for. Now they had the legal pretext within which they could begin their assault upon any individual or group or website which they felt was a threat to the national interests of the state of Israel or its ideology, Zionism.

Using Section 13(1) and its Interpretation(2), B’nai Brith Canada stated in its complaint to the CHRC:

“The premise of this complaint is a contention that Arthur Topham and Radicalpress.com contrive to promote ongoing hatred affecting persons identifiable as Jews and/or as citizens of Israel.” [bold is mine]

In other words, these Jewish Lobby groups feel that it should be a “hate crime” to criticize a the foreign nation known as Israel. That is the unique precedent they are hoping to establish in this complaint to the CHR Commission.

The basis for the B’nai Brith Canada complaint was a series of 18 articles posted on RadicalPress.com. For purposes of this request I am short-listing an assortment of those cited below. Anyone wishing to see the full list can do so by going to the following url on the site and scrolling down. See The Radical Press » Blog Archive » CHRC Complaint Against RadicalPress.com from Harry Abrams and B’nai Brith Canada .

LIST OF ARTICLES USED IN B’NAI BRITH COMPLAINT TO CHRC:

The Radical Press »
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » B’nai Brith: Beating the anti-Semitic Drum
B’nai B’rith: Beating the anti-Semitic Drum
By Arthur Topham

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » Nationwide: Racist Me
Nationwide: Racist Me
By Chris Cook

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » Let’s Talk About Jews And Elections
Let’s Talk About Jews And Elections
By Curt Maynard

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » The Seeds of Global Tyranny
The Seeds of Global Tyranny
By Arthur Topham

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » Judaism is Nobody’s Friend
Judaism is Nobody’s Friend
By Mark Glenn

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » Elie Wiesel’s Holocaust Tale
Elie Wiesel’s Holocaust Tale
By Eric Hunt

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » Judaism: A Conspiracy Against Jews, Humanity?
Judaism: A Conspiracy Against Jews, Humanity?
By Henry Makow

The Radical Press » Blog Archive » The Many Masks of Zionism
The Many Masks of Zionism
By Arthur Topham

The complaint was accepted by the CHRC and has moved through a series of stages culminating in a decision to pass it on to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT). Thanks to Sec. 13(1) and its Interpretation(2) these two quasi-judicial bodies – the commission and tribunal – now form what is, in essence, the yin and yang of Canada’s latest instrument of Internet censorship – one initially and supposedly designed to protect the rights of visible minorities and handicapped workers in the labour market – but now, thanks to 9/11 and the legal machinations of the pro-Zionist Lobby groups in Canada like B’nai Brith Canada, the Canadian Jewish Congress and the Simon Weisenthal Center, these two former bureaucratic organizations have shape-shifted into a lethal weapon designed to kill, via coercive, unjust legislation, Canada’s supreme right to freedom of speech on the net.

The current Tribunal stage involves holding a public hearing during which the complainant(s) and the respondent (myself and RadicalPress.com) will be given the opportunity to present our respective arguments.

As part of my defense I will be presenting a portfolio of letters from Internet users, both in Canada and around the world, who support the inherent right of all Canadians to freedom of speech on the Internet.

It goes without saying that the Internet, being an anarchic construct from its inception, knows neither centralized authority nor national boundaries thus providing an open and accessibility global forum and library in terms of freedom of information and the ability to express ones opinions in an atmosphere of neutrality and non-coercion.

But this once sacred domain is no longer safe and without immediate action by the blogosphere and Internet users in general its fate is to become more and more restricted and controlled by the Zionist forces now in control of all the rest of the world’s mainstream media.

Time is of the essence. I have until March 20th, 2009 to submit a Statement of Particulars to the Tribunal which is a description of the material facts that I intend to use in support of my arguments to have this vexatious charge thrown out. An important part of that evidence will be the letters of support submitted in my favour and in support of freedom of speech on the net.

So please, if you are concerned about this imminent threat to Internet censorship and the loss of freedom of speech in Canada then please take the time to scan the articles being attacked by B’nai Brith Canada, as well as others that are on the RadicalPress.com website and if you disagree with Sec. 13(1) then please write a letter to the Tribunal stating so.

Also, it is very important that you send me a cc copy of your letter at radical@radicalpress.com . It should be understood that in writing such a letter one ought to be civil and refrain from excessive and aggressive language. I will, in turn, use them in my struggle to help defeat this attack upon our most basic and cherished right as human beings living in a free society.

Please address your letter in support of RadicalPress.com and Freedom of Speech to:

Nancy Lafontant
Registry Officer
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Nancy.Lafontant@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca

Please refer to File Number: T1360/9008

CC a copy of your letter to:

RadicalPress.com
radical@radicalpress.com

Thank you for supporting Freedom of Speech in Canada. If you have any further questions regarding this matter please feel free to write me at radical@radicalpress.com .

Shine your Light for Love & Peace & Justice for All,

Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
radical@radicalpress.com
The Radical Press
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”

 

[Cliffy]

Suggested Subject title:

B’nai Brith Canada v. RadicalPress.com/T1360/9008Canada

Your name and contact info:

Nancy Lafontant
Registry Officer
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Nancy.Lafontant@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca

Date:

Dear Nancy Lafontant,

RE: File Number: T1360/9008

The complaint case by the Canadian Human Rights Commission involving Arthur Topham and his website RadicalPress.com and Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada is one in which I take a serious interest.

As a person who believes very strongly in the fundamental right of ALL Canadians to be able to express their opinions and views without fear of legal repercussions I wish to register my dissatisfaction with the fact that special lobby groups in Canada are attempting to use the Canadian Human Rights Act and Sec. 13(1) to stop their fellow Canadians from expressing their opinions and beliefs on matters of importance to Canada.

I strongly feel that a person’s right to speak their mind in an open, civil and truthful manner on political, social and religious issues of the day is crucial to an understanding of how our society and the world at large works and that a person’s viewpoint should not be censored merely because it disagrees with either the status quo or the position of another interest group with differing political views.

Judging from how this Sec. 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act has been used to unfairly penalize free expression in Canada I believe that this legislation should be removed from the CHR Act and that issue of “hate crimes” should be dealt with as in the Criminal Code of Canada where a person thus charged has the right to a fair trial in a court of law with either a Judge or a Judge and Jury.

Thank you,

 

[Cliffy]

Dear Nancy Lafontant,

RE: File Number: T1360/9008

The complaint case by the Canadian Human Rights Commission involving Arthur Topham and his website RadicalPress.com and Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada is one in which I take a serious interest.

I have personally known Arthur Topham for nearly thirty years. I can attest to this commission and tribunal, that in all the years that I have know Arthur, he has been a man of intense passion, principles and integrity. I have never known him to be racist or hateful toward any individual, race or religious creed. He has always stood up for the oppressed and the under privileged.

His views of Zionism are not aimed at the Jewish people but at what many consider an oppressive political organization that has little to do with the Jewish people or their religion. In fact there are more Christian Zionist than there are Jewish Zionists, so the contention of the B’nai Brith and Harry Abrams that Arthur is spreading hate toward Jews is a complete fallacy.

If anyone should be tried for defamation of character and spreading hate, it is Harry Abrams and the B’nai Brith for their persecution of an honest and caring man and for their attack on the basic rights of humans to free speech.

Thank you,

 

[VanIsle]

Dear Nancy Lafontant,

RE: File Number: T1360/9008

The complaint case by the Canadian Human Rights Commission involving Arthur Topham and his website RadicalPress.com and Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada is one in which I take a serious interest.

I have personally known Arthur Topham for nearly thirty years. I can attest to this commission and tribunal, that in all the years that I have know Arthur, he has been a man of intense passion, principles and integrity. I have never known him to be racist or hateful toward any individual, race or religious creed. He has always stood up for the oppressed and the under privileged.

His views of Zionism are not aimed at the Jewish people but at what many consider an oppressive political organization that has little to do with the Jewish people or their religion. In fact there are more Christian Zionist than there are Jewish Zionists, so the contention of the B’nai Brith and Harry Abrams that Arthur is spreading hate toward Jews is a complete fallacy.

If anyone should be tried for defamation of character and spreading hate, it is Harry Abrams and the B’nai Brith for their persecution of an honest and caring man and for their attack on the basic rights of humans to free speech.

Thank you,

Free speech is one thing and we should have free speech as long as we do not defame ourselves. I am 100% against Freedom of the Press though. I'm sure you have heard me say over and over that I believe in limited freedom of the press. I believe the press is about the greatest danger to the world and that they should have proof to back up any story they write. That would stop all the rot they print and the trouble they cause. I just had to take up some of my freedom of speech to say that!

 

[Colpy]

Dear Nancy Lafontant,

RE: File Number: T1360/9008

The complaint case by the Canadian Human Rights Commission involving Arthur Topham and his website RadicalPress.com and Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada is one in which I take a serious interest.

I have personally known Arthur Topham for nearly thirty years. I can attest to this commission and tribunal, that in all the years that I have know Arthur, he has been a man of intense passion, principles and integrity. I have never known him to be racist or hateful toward any individual, race or religious creed. He has always stood up for the oppressed and the under privileged.

His views of Zionism are not aimed at the Jewish people but at what many consider an oppressive political organization that has little to do with the Jewish people or their religion. In fact there are more Christian Zionist than there are Jewish Zionists, so the contention of the B’nai Brith and Harry Abrams that Arthur is spreading hate toward Jews is a complete fallacy.

If anyone should be tried for defamation of character and spreading hate, it is Harry Abrams and the B’nai Brith for their persecution of an honest and caring man and for their attack on the basic rights of humans to free speech.

Thank you,

First of all, let me say I think you are absolutely correct in the assertion that the attack on Radical Press is an attempt to violate the principles of free speech, that thought control is unacceptable, that Canadian law is way out of bounds on the subject.

I include the criticism of Canadian law because the articles that are in question are, without any doubt whatsoever, intended to incite hatred against Jews, and are not only a concern of the Human Rights CommissionTrbunal, but are clearly a violation under the Canadian Criminal Code. Any reading list that starts with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is intended as an attack on Jews, using the most outrageous lies, and intends to promote hatred of Jews, with the ultimate goal being another try at the holocaust.....except this time getting them all.

Having said that, and having expressed by interest in free speech, allow me to ask you a question, as (to be truthful) I doubt your motives: Would your definition allow me to print articles calling Mohammed a fraud, a pervert, a child molester and a liar.....equating Islam with absolute evil, a religion that glorifies the murder of babies.........and call for the eviction of all Muslims from the West, and all Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza......as that territory is clearly part of Greater Israel?

Or does freedom of speech merely mean the freedom to agree with you.....or some set of preconceived "truths"?

 

[Cliffy]

First of all, let me say I think you are absolutely correct in the assertion that the attack on Radical Press is an attempt to violate the principles of free speech, that thought control is unacceptable, that Canadian law is way out of bounds on the subject.

I include the criticism of Canadian law because the articles that are in question are, without any doubt whatsoever, intended to incite hatred against Jews, and are not only a concern of the Human Rights CommissionTrbunal, but are clearly a violation under the Canadian Criminal Code. Any reading list that starts with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is intended as an attack on Jews, using the most outrageous lies, and intends to promote hatred of Jews, with the ultimate goal being another try at the holocaust.....except this time getting them all.

Having said that, and having expressed by interest in free speech, allow me to ask you a question, as (to be truthful) I doubt your motives: Would your definition allow me to print articles calling Mohammed a fraud, a pervert, a child molester and a liar.....equating Islam with absolute evil, a religion that glorifies the murder of babies.........and call for the eviction of all Muslims from the West, and all Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza......as that territory is clearly part of Greater Israel?

Or does freedom of speech merely mean the freedom to agree with you.....or some set of preconceived "truths"?

First off, your interpretation of Arthur's works is way off the mark. He is married to and is still in love with after thirty years, a beautiful Jewish woman. An attack on Zionism is not an attack on the Jewish peoples. It is an attack on the genocidal policies of the Zionist controlled government of Israel. How do you account for Jews Against Zion"? Are they self hating Jews or are they wising up to the fact that they have been taken over by a fascist organization? And how do you account for their being more Christian Zionist than Jewish ones? Does anti-Zionist sentiments equate to hatred of all Christians too?

I knew when i posted this thread that i would flush out radical right wing Zion supporters. You're the first to take the bait. Your blind support for the genocidal policies of Israel against the Palestinian people speaks loudly, yay screams, to your lack of compassion for humanity.

What surprises me is that the free speech crowd is so silent.

 

[Colpy]

First off, your interpretation of Arthur's works is way off the mark. He is married to and is still in love with after thirty years, a beautiful Jewish woman. An attack on Zionism is not an attack on the Jewish peoples. It is an attack on the genocidal policies of the Zionist controlled government of Israel. How do you account for Jews Against Zion"? Are they self hating Jews or are they wising up to the fact that they have been taken over by a fascist organization? And how do you account for their being more Christian Zionist than Jewish ones? Does anti-Zionist sentiments equate to hatred of all Christians too?

I knew when i posted this thread that i would flush out radical right wing Zion supporters. You're the first to take the bait. Your blind support for the genocidal policies of Israel against the Palestinian people speaks loudly, yay screams, to your lack of compassion for humanity.

What surprises me is that the free speech crowd is so silent.

First of all, I defend this scumball's right to pur forth hatred, I hate thought control: yet you failed to answer my question: Is your support of Free Speech only a support of my right to agree with you? From your answer, I have little choice but conclude that is EXACTLY what you mean.

Secondly , the crap this guy is publishing has less to do with Zionism than it does with Jew hatred, and I don't give a damn who he is married to....... I suggest you read up on The Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion and Holocaust denial.....you really don't seem to know what you are defending. This is the kind of stuff than makes Jewish Zionism only common sense....its called survival.

Thirdly, you repeatedly refer to the genocidal policies of Israel against the Palestinians. I respectfully suggest you buy a dictionary and look up the word "genocide"....if genocide is what the Jews have been practising against the Palestinians, they have been superbly unsuccessful at it......considering how the population of Arabs inside Israel and inside the "refugee camps", Gaza and the West Bank is GROWING by leaps and bounds...... the accusation of genocide is ridiculous, so ludicrous as to discredit the rest of your post.

Fourth, I don't need to be "flushed out" as a supporter of Israel, I'm proud of it. I propose what should be "flushed" is the murderous crap you are defending.

 

[Cliffy]

My goodness. That was a pretty hate filled comment there Colpy. I support free speech, even your right to spread hate and lies about someone you don't even know.

 

[Colpy]

My goodness. That was a pretty hate filled comment there Colpy. I support free speech, even your right to spread hate and lies about someone you don't even know.

For one thing, that was a perfectly polite post: I would suggest you address the issues instead of ducking them.....

I am glad you believe in free speech......you should read some of this crap....I went to the piece on Elie Wiesel? The idiot author stalks Wiesel for weeks, confronts in a hotel elevator, physically drags him out of the elevator and down the hall.....saying he wants to "interview" him.....and then calls Wiesal INSANE because he struggles and cries out for help!!!!!!!!
This all by the idiot's own admission....Wiesel is an old man, for God's sake, who has suffered enough at the hands of Nazi thugs.

I suggest you read the article.

 

[Unforgiven]

Why is it always anti semetics that rush for the call to arms those who would support the idea of free speech? No one ever bothers with free speech in China for example. Just when do these Jew hateing SS wannabes head off to Indonesia to spill their blood for those suppressed under threat of death should they talk about what the government is doing to them?

 

[Spade]

I certainly support free speech. However, the fair and impartial reporting of events is unusual, rather than the norm. Every reporter, editor, and publisher brings biases forward to particularly contentious issues. The problem, especially in Canada, is the lack of independent and multiple voices; the media is concentrated in the hands of the very few (cf. CanWest Global, Canada.com) The internet provides some balance.

There have been attempts on both sides of the Middle Eastern morass to stifle dissenting opinion through human-rights tribunals and the courts. That is their right. You will recall the Western Standard's reprinting of the Mohammed cartoons, and their obvious Israeli bias. And, that was the Standard's right. It is the duty of the courts to balance the freedom of speech with restricting the promotion of hatred of any identifiable group - Moslem, Jew, Christian, and so on.

Again, often the intention of these challenges is to stifle free speech or limit dissent. In a "democracy", such as Canada, it would my hope that these challenges are few and dealt fairly by tribunals and courts.

 

[HughJorgan]

Free Speech Issues

I had a look around Arthur's website.
In my opinion, he has some very unhealthy obsessions.

 

[einmensch]

Free speech ---has never and will never exist

 

[Cliffy]

Everyone of us who come here to express our opinions on this forum expect to be able to say what is on our minds. Rarely are we censured. We have a wide range of views and some have been accused of stepping over someone else's line as far as their concept of free speech is concerned.

I believe that it is this wide range and variety of opinions that make it possible to actually discern the truth from the propaganda. Although Arthur Topham is a friend of mine, I do not always agree with take on things and I do not know enough on some subjects (because I am not interested in them) to have an opinion one way or another. But, I do believe he, like every one of us on here, has a right to his opinions and to express them, if for no other reason than sometimes we need to shaken out of our comfort zones.

Complacency and indifference are our enemies, not other people's opinions.

 

[Liberalman]

Free hate speech produces anarchy. Hitler was a true believer in free hate speech and this is why he was able to exterminate millions of Jewish people men, women and children.

I just like to know what his hidden agenda is but we will never know until it is too late

 

[Colpy]

Free hate speech produces anarchy. Hitler was a true believer in free hate speech and this is why he was able to exterminate millions of Jewish people men, women and children.

I just like to know what his hidden agenda is but we will never know until it is too late

Ah! A true member of the Liberal Party of Canada speaks......."Everyone is free to believe and speak as they see fit.....as long as they see fit to agree with me"

 

[JLM]

Free speech is one thing and we should have free speech as long as we do not defame ourselves. I am 100% against Freedom of the Press though. I'm sure you have heard me say over and over that I believe in limited freedom of the press. I believe the press is about the greatest danger to the world and that they should have proof to back up any story they write. That would stop all the rot they print and the trouble they cause. I just had to take up some of my freedom of speech to say that!

The Press can sell a story only if people are buying it. I don't "buy" everything I read and at the very least keep an eye peeled for amended versions. You take the "gutter tabloids", the only reason they sell is because there are idiots out there that buy them.

 

[Spade]

Ah! A true member of the Liberal Party of Canada speaks......."Everyone is free to believe and speak as they see fit.....as long as they see fit to agree with me"

No, Colpy, that is an illiberal, book-burning, tie-him-to-a-stake view that Liberalman espouses. His views contradict his handle.

 

[L Gilbert]

The Press can sell a story only if people are buying it. I don't "buy" everything I read and at the very least keep an eye peeled for amended versions. You take the "gutter tabloids", the only reason they sell is because there are idiots out there that buy them.

Actually there are some that buy them for their humor value. Even I like reading some of the headlines sometimes. I mean jeeeez; "Woman gives birth to 8 pound pearl", "Woman gives birth to 27 year old son", "Oprah hits 246 pounds"? It beats watching the old lady in front of me digging around in her suitcase sized purse for 3 pennies to make up the exact change.

 

[Kreskin]

There are laws that someone believes he has broken. He hasn't been found guilty, only ordered to make his case in front of the tribunal to see if the law was broken. If he so convinced that what he has written is not hate speech then what's his worry and why bother asking others to fight his battle?