Author: admin

B’nai Brith: Beating the anti-Semitic Drum

[Editor’s Note: While this piece was written almost two years back I thought that considering the recent attack by this Zionist front organization on another Canadian news site it would be appropriate to let readers know a bit more about its origins and designs. Please pass this article to as many as you can.]
B’nai Brith: Beating the anti-Semitic Drum
By Arthur Topham
Sept. 3, 2005
The recent attack upon Mr. Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa, by the pro-Zionist media (Ottawa Citizen) and one of its principal internal organs, the B’nai Brith, is worthy of additional historic perspective in order to further delineate the modus operandi of these instruments of political propaganda and social control.
To assist in comprehending the breadth and depth of this universal scheme to silence dissent and permit an unleashed, purposeful program of pro-Israeli propaganda to emerge throughout Canada’s mainstream media, one affecting both the mass mind of the citizenry as well as the nation’s legal and social fabric, it’s imperative that concerned individuals be aware of the nascent beginnings of organizations such as the B’nai Brith and one of its more controversial offshoots known as the Anti-Defamation League (A.D.L.). The latter organization, while rarely appearing in today’s controlled press due to its own self-induced ill-repute, is still a force to be reckoned with and one of paramount influence in the false proselytizing of the absurd notion of ‘anti-Semitism’.
In order to define this illogical phenomenon and expose its nefarious purpose it is necessary that the reader be furnished with some extensively researched commentary from a book written fifty years ago by a once famed (and now defamed) British author and journalist by the name of Douglas Reed.
In his virtually unknown, yet massively documented and scholarly seminal work on the history of Political Zionism and its effects upon the past and present global political situation, (The Controversy of Zion, Dolphin Press (Pty) Ltd., 1978)[1] http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=34 Mr. Douglas Reed, former Chief European war correspondent for the London Times and successful author of numerous popular books written prior to, during and after WWII, gives us some extremely pertinent contextual information concerning both the B’nai Brith and the A.D.L. which places the latest assault upon Mr. Chossudovsky in a more clearly defined light.
Reed was no slouch when it came to covering historical events of his time and his first book, The Reichstag Fire, which appeared in 1934 was proof of his ability to discern the manoeuverings of factions working behind the scenes to manipulate public perception, thwart reasonable analysis and control agendas for ulterior purposes.
Having spent seven years in Berlin and adjacent European countries throughout the 1930s observing and discussing political strategy with Prime Ministers and Kings, Reed was able to accumulate information and impressions that most journalists would not otherwise be privy to. As the pieces of the puzzling times began to take shape before his analytical eye Reed eventually concluded that the hidden hand behind paradigm-shattering decisions of the period was none other than that of the Political Zionists and those in high office whom they were able to solicit for support.
In 1938, on the eve of WW II, Reed began to notice, with growing concern, that his submissions to the Times (which by then was under Zionist control) were either being altered or eliminated altogether in favour of stories that were the exact opposite of the real conditions which he was witnessing on the ground in Germany and elsewhere. This frustration eventually resulted in Reed resigning from the paper and publishing his second book called Insanity Fair which was a summation of all that he had gleaned of political events over the past seven years. The book was an instant success throughout Britain, Europe and North America and its prophetic warnings were soon to be revealed as truth as the second great world war unfolded.
In order to facilitate this much-needed perspective one needs to cast an eye back almost a full century to the period of U.S. President Wilson’s years in office and the time of the first world war. It was during this era that the original silent coup by Zionist forces usurped the independence of the White House and placed its exclusive powers in the hands of Wilson’s chief ‘Advisor’ Mr. Colonel House, a pro-Zionist proponent.
Reed describes President Wilson as ‘a captive president’ as the war drew nigh and states that after his election ‘Mr. House took over his correspondence, arranged whom he should see or not receive, told Cabinet officers what they were to say or not to say, and so on.’[2]
Reed, who was born in 1895 just two years prior to Theodor Herzl (Political Zionism’s official founder) setting up the World Zionist Organization in 1897, grew up during the early years of the 20th Century and came of age, politically-speaking, while living in Europe throughout the thirties and forties and witnessing in detail the intimate machinations by the world leaders who were then rearranging the pieces on the world’s political chessboard.
In his exhaustive analysis of how the Zionists slowly, but surely, overtook the U.S. government’s executive levels of command, the better to gain control of policy-making for the exclusive purpose of acquiring the lands of Palestine to create their ‘State’ of Israel, Reed emphasizes the crucial role played by groups such as the B’nai B’rith and the Anti-defamation League in blocking all criticism of their efforts through the use of blackmail, intimidation and public vilification of the sort we’re now seeing employed in the Chossudovsky case [and now two years later the PEJ.org incident. Ed.].
It was after this period of initiation into the inner workings of intrigue by the Zionist forces that he began voicing his comments on the B’nai Brith. He writes:
‘At that period (1913) [of Colonel House and W. Wilson, A.T.] an event occurred which seemed of little importance then but needs recording here because of its later, large consequence. In America was an organization called B’nai Brith (Hebrew for ‘Children of the Covenant’). Founded in 1843 as a fraternal lodge exclusively for Jews, it was called ‘purely an American institution’, but it put out branches in many countries and today claims to ‘represent all Jews throughout the world’, so that it appears to be part of the arrangement described by Dr. Kastein[3] as ‘the Jewish international’. In 1913 B’nai Brith put out a tiny offshoot, the ‘Anti-Defamation League’. It was to grow to great size and power; in it the state-within-states acquired a kind of secret police and it will reappear in this story.’[4]
In Chapter 43, aptly titled ‘The Invasion of America’, Reed describes to a tee the techniques presently applied to Michel Chossudovsky in order to discredit his person, his work and at the same time expunge from the mass mind the true motives of Israeli domestic and foreign policies. Please witness the following comments:
‘While military invasions and counter-invasions multiplied during the six years of the Second War, absorbing all thought and energy of the masses locked in combat, a silent invasion went on which produced more momentous effects than the armed ones. This was the political invasion of the American Republic and its success was shown by the shape of American state policy at the war’s end, which was so directed as to ensure that the only military invasions that yielded enduring ‘territorial gains’ were those of the revolution into Europe and of the Zionists into Arabia . . .[5]
‘The renewal of large-scale immigration formed the background to the political invasion of the Republic. This was a three-pronged movement which aimed at the capture of the three vital points of a state’s defenses: state policy at the top level, the civil services at the middle level and ‘public opinion’ or the mass-mind at the base. The way in which control over acts of state policy was achieved (through the ‘adviserships’ which became part of American political life after 1913) has already been shown, this part of the process having preceded the others. The methods used to attempt the capture of government services will be discussed later in this chapter. In what immediately follows the capture of the mass-mind in America, through control of published information, will be described; it was indispensable to the other two thrusts.
‘This form of political invasion is called by Dr. Weizmann[6], who exhaustively studied it in his youth, when he was preparing in Russia for his life’s work in the west, ‘the technique of propaganda and the approach to the masses’. The operation so described may now be studied in actual operation:
‘Far back in this book the reader was invited to note that ‘B’nai Brith’ put out a shoot. B’nai Brith, until then, might be compared with such groups of other religious affiliation as the Young Men’s Christian Association or the Knights of Columbus; its declared objects were the help of the poor, sick and fatherless and good works in general. The little offshoot of 1913, the ‘Anti-Defamation League’, had by 1947 become a secret police of formidable power in America.*
‘In Doublespeak ‘anti-defamation’ means ‘defamation’ and this body lived by calumny, using such terms as anti-semite, fascist, rabble-rouser, Jew-baiter, Red-baiter, paranoiac, lunatic, madman, reactionary, diehard, bigot and more of the like. The vocabulary is fixed and may be traced back to the attacks on Barruel, Robison and Morse after the French revolution; the true nature of any writer’s or newspaper’s allegiance may be detected by keeping count of the number of times these trade-mark words are used. The achievement of this organization (usually known as the A.D.L.) has been by iteration to make fetishes of them, so that party politicians hasten to deny that they are any of these things. Under this regime reasoned debate became outlawed; there is something of sorcery in this subjugation of two generations of Western men to the mumbo-jumbo of Asiatic conspirators.
‘When the A.D.L. was born in 1913 it had merely desk-room in the parent B’nai Brith office and a tiny budget. In 1933 Mr. Bernard J. Brown wrote, ‘Through the intervention of the A.D.L. we have succeeded in muzzling the non-Jewish press to the extent that newspapers in America abstain from pointing out that any person unfavourably referred to is a Jew’. In 1948 the Jewish Menorah Journal of New York wrote, ‘Should but one phrase in a reprinted literary classic reflect unjustly upon Jews, the A.D.L. will promptly belabour the innocent publisher until he bowdlerizes the offending passage. Let one innocent movie-producer incorporate a Jewish prototype, however inoffensive, in his picture and the hue and cry raised by the A.D.L. will make him wish he’s never heard of Jews . . .
‘These quotations show the growth of the A.D.L.’s power in thirty-five years. It has imposed the law of heresy on the public debate in America. No criticism of Zionism or the world-government plan is allowed to pass without virulent attack; . . .
‘America has today a few surviving writers who fight on for independent debate and comment. They will discuss any public matter, in the light of traditional American policy and interest, save Zionism, which hardly any of them will touch. I have discussed this with four of the leading ones, who all gave the same answer: it could not be done. The employed ones would lose their posts, if they made the attempt. The independent ones would find no publisher for their books because no reviewer would mention these, save with the epithets enumerated above.[7]
‘The A.D.L., of such small beginnings in 1913, in 1948 had a budget of three million dollars (it is only one of several Jewish organizations pursuing Zionist aims in America at a similar rate of expenditure). The Menorah Journal, discussing ‘Anti-Defamation Hysteria’, said, ‘Fighting anti-semitism has been built up into a big business, with annual budgets running into millions of dollars’. It said the object was ‘to continue beating the anti-semitic drum’ and ‘to scare the pants off prospective contributors’ in order to raise funds. It mentioned some of the methods used (’outright business blackmail; if you can’t afford to give $10,000 to this cause, you can take your business elsewhere’), and said American Jews were being ‘stampeded into a state of mass-hysteria by their self-styled defenders’.[8]
An interesting point which Reed made back in the 1950s, and which today is probably more relevant considering the 1984-ish times we’re living in, involved one of the current icons of anti-dictatorship and anti-totalitarianism, Mr. George Orwell. According to Reed even Orwell succumbed in some measure to the then pervasive pressures being exerted on the general public by these agents of one world government. He states:
‘‘Mass-hysteria’ is not only produced among Jews and band-wagon politicians by this method; it produces another kind of mass-hysteria among earnest but uninformed people of the ‘Liberal’ kind: the mass-hysteria of self-righteousness, which is a tempting form of self-indulgence. The late Mr. George Orwell was of those who helped spread ‘mass-hysteria’ in this way. He was a good man, because he did not merely incite others to succour the weak and avenge injustice, but went himself to fight when the Civil War broke out in Spain, then discovering that Communism, when he saw it, was worse than the thing which (as he thought) he set out to destroy. He died before he could go to Palestine and experience any similar enlightenment, so that what he wrote about ‘anti-semitism’ was but the echo of ‘anti-defamationist hysteria’. It is so good an example of this that I quote it; here a man of goodwill offered, as his own wisdom, phrases which others poured into his ear.
‘He explored ‘anti-semitism in Britain’ (1945) and found ’ a perceptibly anti-semitic strain in Chaucer’. Mr. Hilaire Belloc and Mr. G.K.Chesterton were ‘literary Jew-baiters’. He found passages in Shakespeare, Smollett, Thackeray, Shaw, T.S. Eliot, Aldous Huxley and others ‘which if written now would be stigmatized as anti-semitism’ (he was right without knowing it; if written now they would have been stigmatized). Then he suffered what Americans call a pratfall. He said that ‘offhand, the only English writers I can think of who, before the days of Hitler, made a definite effort to stick up for Jews are Dickens and Charles Reade’. Thus he extolled one of the A.D.L.’s ‘Jew-baiters’ as a champion of Jews; in America the film of Oliver Twist was banned because of Fagin! This was the work of the A.D.L.; its representative, a Mr. Arnold Forster, announced:
‘‘American movie-distributors refused to become involved in the distribution and exhibition of the motion picture after the A.D.L. and others expressed the fear that the film was harmful; the Rank Organization withdrew the picture in the United States’. Later the picture was released after censorship by the A.D.L.; ‘seventy two eliminations’ were made at its command and a prologue was added assuring beholders that they might accept it as ‘a filmization of Dickens without anti-semitic intentions’. (In occupied Berlin the A.D.L. ban was final; the British authorities ordered Dickens withdrawn from German eyes).
‘I was in America at this time and thus saw the fulfillment of a prediction made in a book of 1943, when I wrote that, as the secret censorship was going, Chaucer, Shakespeare and Dickens would one day be defamed as ‘anti-semites’. I thought to strain probability, to make a point, but it happened in all three cases: a Shakespearean actor-manager visiting New York was ordered not to play The Merchant of Venice, Dickens was banned, and the defamationists put Chaucer on their black-list.
‘A private organization which can produce such results is obviously powerful; there is nothing comparable in the world. Mr. Vincent Sheehan wrote in 1949, ‘There is scarcely a voice in the United States that dares raise itself for the rights, any rights, of the Arabs; any slight criticism of the Zionist high command is immediately labelled as anti-semitic.’. . .
‘How is the oracle worked? By what means has America (and the entire West) been brought to the state that no public man aspires to office, or editor feels secure at his desk, until he has brought out his prayer-mat and prostrated himself to Zion? How have presidents and prime ministers been led to compete for the approval of this faction like bridesmaids for the bride’s bouquet? Why do leading men suffer themselves to be paraded at hundred-dollar-a-plate banquets for Zion, or to be herded on to Zionist platforms to receive ‘plaques’ for services rendered?
‘The power of money and the prospect of votes have demonstrably been potent lures, but in my judgment by far the strongest weapon is this power to control published information; to lay stress on what a faction wants and to exclude from it all that the faction dislikes, and so to be able to give any selected person a ‘good’ or a ‘bad’ press. [emphasis added. A.T.] This is in fact control of ‘the mob’. In today’s language it is ‘the technique of propaganda and the approach to the masses’, as Dr. Weizmann said, but it is an ancient, Asiatic art and was described, on a famous occasion, by Saint Matthew and Saint Mark: ‘The chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude . . . The chief priests moved the people . . .’
‘In forty years the A.D.L. perfected a machine for persuading the multitude. It is a method of thought-control of which the subject-mass is unconscious and its ability to destroy any who cry out is great . . .
‘The A.D.L. (and the American Jewish Committee) ‘set out to make the American people aware of anti-semitism’. It informed Jews that ‘25 out of every 100 Americans are infected with anti-semitism’, and that another 50 might develop the disease. By 1945 it was carrying out ‘a high-powered educational program, geared to reach every man, woman and child’ in America through the press, radio, advertising, children’s comic books and school books, lectures, films, ‘churches’ and trade unions. This programme included ‘219 broadcasts a day’, full-page advertisements in 397 newspapers, poster advertizing in 130 cities, and ‘persuasions’ subtly incorporated in the printed matter on blotters, matchbox covers, and envelopes. The entire national press (’1900 dailies with a 43,000,000 circulation’) and the provincial, Negro, foreign-language and labour newspapers were kept supplied with, ‘and used’, its material in the form of ‘news, background material, cartoons and comic strips’. In addition, the A.D.L. in 1945 distributed ‘more than 330,000 copies of important books carrying our message to libraries and other institutions’, furnished authors with ‘material and complete ideas’, and circulated nine million pamphlets ‘all tailored to fit the audiences to which they are directed’. It found ‘comic books’ to be a particularly effective way of reaching the minds of young people, soldiers, sailors and airmen, and circulated ‘millions of copies’ of propaganda in this form. Its organization consisted of the national headquarters, public relations committees in 150 cities, eleven regional offices, and ‘2,000 key men in 1,000 cities’.
‘The name of the body which supplied this mass of suggestive material never reached the public. During the 1940’s the system of ‘syndicated writers’ in New York or Washington enveloped the entire American press. One such writer’s column may appear in a thousand newspapers each day; editors like this system, which saves them the cost of employing their own writers, for its cheapness. Through a few dozen such writers the entire stream of information can be tinctured at its source . . . By all these means a generation has been reared in America (and this applies equally to England [and Canada. A.T.]) which has been deprived of authentic information about, and independent comment on, the nature of Zionism, its original connection with Communism, the infestation of administrations and capture of ‘administrators’, and the relationship of all this to the ultimate world-government project.’ [9]
In 1949 Douglas Reed traveled throughout the United States prior to writing his book, Far and Wide, which was his first-hand impressions of America and a final summation of the influences that Political Zionism was having upon the nation to that point. It was to be his final publication prior to the Zionists imposing a general ban on his works which eventually led to a virtual annulling of his name in published circles around the world.
His conclusions though have, as in the case of Insanity Fair again proven to be the most prophetic of the 20th Century in terms of how the Zionist agenda functions and what its ends are designed to produce. As he states in a chapter called ‘Zionism Paramount’, America suffers from ‘three servitudes’: those being the influences of Russian Communism (a product of Zionism) which had infiltrated the bureaucratic levels of government during Roosevelt’s tenure as president; the debilitating effects of organized crime; and the greatest of all, Political Zionism. He writes:
‘The three forces which weaken the whole structure of American public life in effect serve the strongest among themselves, Political Zionism, which stands behind the seats of the mighty while the others work in lesser places, if to similar ends of power-over-politicians. The proof of this supremacy is to be found by a simple test: the extent to which public discussion is permitted . . . At the topmost level, a virtual ban on public discussion of Political Zionism proves the paramountcy of its sway in American affairs. As in England, the open expression of doubt about this territorial ambition, and support for it, has been almost driven underground in recent years. An imperial thrall has been laid on America in this matter. Traditional Americans, whose forebears detested laws of lese-majesty and the genuflections of courts, now find their leaders performing an even humbler obeisance in this direction; like foremost politicians in England, they thus emulate those Rumanian nobles who long bowed to the Sultan’s rule, vainly hoping to keep rank and possessions. The Soviet ban on ‘anti-Semitism’ (which was in effect a veto on public discussion of the origins of Communism) has in practice been extended to the British island and the American Republic in the matter of Political Zionism. It is lese-majesty [i.e. treason A.T.] in a new form and because of it present-day Americans and Englishmen do not as a rule see the grave future courses and penalties to which support of Political Zionism has committed them.’[10]
It takes little extrapolating to see that all which Reed described in his foregoing comments dovetails smoothly with the apparent convoluted, confusing and tumultuous period that we’re now experiencing in global politics. To elaborate further upon that subject must remain the labour of another article and another time. What is essential here is that readers note the connection of events and the fact that the Political Zionists are still very much alive and alert to their diligent and determined effort to destroy the sovereignty of nation-states, serve the interests of Israel and bring in the ill-fated New World Order under the auspices of their original plan, the United Nations.
To these ends organizations such as the B’nai Brith and the A.D.L. have evolved and continue to act as Zionist watchdogs and public censors. It is not surprising therefore that they would eventually attack even those of Jewish decent such as Michel Chossudovsky for Political Zionism’s bold and ambition plans for global dominance owes allegiance only to its proponents and thus their exclusive and racial policies of imperialism continue to pose a direct threat to both the Christian and Moslem world. Our ultimate freedom therefore depends upon our ability to combat this censorship of free speech which continually keeps the occult nature of Political Zionism hidden from the public eye.
————
Arthur Topham is the publisher/editor for The Radical Press. http://www.radicalpress.com He lives in British Columbia, Canada. He can be contacted at [email protected]
* In fact though not in form. The secret police in countries where the institution is native (Hitler’s Gestapo was copied from the Asiatic model, which had a century-old tradition in Russia and Turkey) have their entire power and resources of the state behind them; indeed, they are the state. In America Zionism built the nucleus of a secret police nearly as effective in many ways as those prototypes. It could only become equally effective if it gained full control of the state’s resources, including the power of arrest and imprisonment, and in my judgment that was the ultimate goal.
Footnotes:
[1] The book can be found in the U.S.A. at Abebooks.com and is also available online at the Radical Forum http://www.radicalpress.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1218
[2] Controversy of Zion, Page 242
[3] Dr. Joseph Kastein according to Reed was a ‘zealous’ Zionist historian who wrote the book, History and Destiny of the Jews, (Eng. trans., London, 1933). He is extensively quoted by Douglas Reed in his book Controversy of Zion.
[4] Controversy of Zion Page 243
[5] Controversy of Zion, Page 339
[6] Dr. Chaim Weizmann was a tireless proponent of Zionism. Having supplanted Theodor Herzl as the leader of the World Zionist Organization back in 1904 his influence throughout the formative years of the first half of the 20th Century upon the creation of Israel is well documented. He eventually became Israel’s first Prime Minister in 1948.
[7] Reed had first-hand experience of this practise. In 1952 the Canadian Jewish Congress requested that Canadian booksellers refuse to carry his books.
[8] Controversy of Zion, Pages 340 – 342
[9] Controversy of Zion, Pages 342-345
[10] Far and Wide, Page 274.

{ Comments are closed }

[Editor’s Note: While this piece was written almost two years back I thought that considering the recent attack by this Zionist front organization on another Canadian news site it would be appropriate to let readers know a bit more about its origins and designs. Please pass this article to as many as you can.]
B’nai Brith: Beating the anti-Semitic Drum
By Arthur Topham
Sept. 3, 2005
The recent attack upon Mr. Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa, by the pro-Zionist media (Ottawa Citizen) and one of its principal internal organs, the B’nai Brith, is worthy of additional historic perspective in order to further delineate the modus operandi of these instruments of political propaganda and social control.
To assist in comprehending the breadth and depth of this universal scheme to silence dissent and permit an unleashed, purposeful program of pro-Israeli propaganda to emerge throughout Canada’s mainstream media, one affecting both the mass mind of the citizenry as well as the nation’s legal and social fabric, it’s imperative that concerned individuals be aware of the nascent beginnings of organizations such as the B’nai Brith and one of its more controversial offshoots known as the Anti-Defamation League (A.D.L.). The latter organization, while rarely appearing in today’s controlled press due to its own self-induced ill-repute, is still a force to be reckoned with and one of paramount influence in the false proselytizing of the absurd notion of ‘anti-Semitism’.
In order to define this illogical phenomenon and expose its nefarious purpose it is necessary that the reader be furnished with some extensively researched commentary from a book written fifty years ago by a once famed (and now defamed) British author and journalist by the name of Douglas Reed.
In his virtually unknown, yet massively documented and scholarly seminal work on the history of Political Zionism and its effects upon the past and present global political situation, (The Controversy of Zion, Dolphin Press (Pty) Ltd., 1978)[1] http://www.radicalpress.com/?page_id=34 Mr. Douglas Reed, former Chief European war correspondent for the London Times and successful author of numerous popular books written prior to, during and after WWII, gives us some extremely pertinent contextual information concerning both the B’nai Brith and the A.D.L. which places the latest assault upon Mr. Chossudovsky in a more clearly defined light.
Reed was no slouch when it came to covering historical events of his time and his first book, The Reichstag Fire, which appeared in 1934 was proof of his ability to discern the manoeuverings of factions working behind the scenes to manipulate public perception, thwart reasonable analysis and control agendas for ulterior purposes.
Having spent seven years in Berlin and adjacent European countries throughout the 1930s observing and discussing political strategy with Prime Ministers and Kings, Reed was able to accumulate information and impressions that most journalists would not otherwise be privy to. As the pieces of the puzzling times began to take shape before his analytical eye Reed eventually concluded that the hidden hand behind paradigm-shattering decisions of the period was none other than that of the Political Zionists and those in high office whom they were able to solicit for support.
In 1938, on the eve of WW II, Reed began to notice, with growing concern, that his submissions to the Times (which by then was under Zionist control) were either being altered or eliminated altogether in favour of stories that were the exact opposite of the real conditions which he was witnessing on the ground in Germany and elsewhere. This frustration eventually resulted in Reed resigning from the paper and publishing his second book called Insanity Fair which was a summation of all that he had gleaned of political events over the past seven years. The book was an instant success throughout Britain, Europe and North America and its prophetic warnings were soon to be revealed as truth as the second great world war unfolded.
In order to facilitate this much-needed perspective one needs to cast an eye back almost a full century to the period of U.S. President Wilson’s years in office and the time of the first world war. It was during this era that the original silent coup by Zionist forces usurped the independence of the White House and placed its exclusive powers in the hands of Wilson’s chief ‘Advisor’ Mr. Colonel House, a pro-Zionist proponent.
Reed describes President Wilson as ‘a captive president’ as the war drew nigh and states that after his election ‘Mr. House took over his correspondence, arranged whom he should see or not receive, told Cabinet officers what they were to say or not to say, and so on.’[2]
Reed, who was born in 1895 just two years prior to Theodor Herzl (Political Zionism’s official founder) setting up the World Zionist Organization in 1897, grew up during the early years of the 20th Century and came of age, politically-speaking, while living in Europe throughout the thirties and forties and witnessing in detail the intimate machinations by the world leaders who were then rearranging the pieces on the world’s political chessboard.
In his exhaustive analysis of how the Zionists slowly, but surely, overtook the U.S. government’s executive levels of command, the better to gain control of policy-making for the exclusive purpose of acquiring the lands of Palestine to create their ‘State’ of Israel, Reed emphasizes the crucial role played by groups such as the B’nai B’rith and the Anti-defamation League in blocking all criticism of their efforts through the use of blackmail, intimidation and public vilification of the sort we’re now seeing employed in the Chossudovsky case [and now two years later the PEJ.org incident. Ed.].
It was after this period of initiation into the inner workings of intrigue by the Zionist forces that he began voicing his comments on the B’nai Brith. He writes:
‘At that period (1913) [of Colonel House and W. Wilson, A.T.] an event occurred which seemed of little importance then but needs recording here because of its later, large consequence. In America was an organization called B’nai Brith (Hebrew for ‘Children of the Covenant’). Founded in 1843 as a fraternal lodge exclusively for Jews, it was called ‘purely an American institution’, but it put out branches in many countries and today claims to ‘represent all Jews throughout the world’, so that it appears to be part of the arrangement described by Dr. Kastein[3] as ‘the Jewish international’. In 1913 B’nai Brith put out a tiny offshoot, the ‘Anti-Defamation League’. It was to grow to great size and power; in it the state-within-states acquired a kind of secret police and it will reappear in this story.’[4]
In Chapter 43, aptly titled ‘The Invasion of America’, Reed describes to a tee the techniques presently applied to Michel Chossudovsky in order to discredit his person, his work and at the same time expunge from the mass mind the true motives of Israeli domestic and foreign policies. Please witness the following comments:
‘While military invasions and counter-invasions multiplied during the six years of the Second War, absorbing all thought and energy of the masses locked in combat, a silent invasion went on which produced more momentous effects than the armed ones. This was the political invasion of the American Republic and its success was shown by the shape of American state policy at the war’s end, which was so directed as to ensure that the only military invasions that yielded enduring ‘territorial gains’ were those of the revolution into Europe and of the Zionists into Arabia . . .[5]
‘The renewal of large-scale immigration formed the background to the political invasion of the Republic. This was a three-pronged movement which aimed at the capture of the three vital points of a state’s defenses: state policy at the top level, the civil services at the middle level and ‘public opinion’ or the mass-mind at the base. The way in which control over acts of state policy was achieved (through the ‘adviserships’ which became part of American political life after 1913) has already been shown, this part of the process having preceded the others. The methods used to attempt the capture of government services will be discussed later in this chapter. In what immediately follows the capture of the mass-mind in America, through control of published information, will be described; it was indispensable to the other two thrusts.
‘This form of political invasion is called by Dr. Weizmann[6], who exhaustively studied it in his youth, when he was preparing in Russia for his life’s work in the west, ‘the technique of propaganda and the approach to the masses’. The operation so described may now be studied in actual operation:
‘Far back in this book the reader was invited to note that ‘B’nai Brith’ put out a shoot. B’nai Brith, until then, might be compared with such groups of other religious affiliation as the Young Men’s Christian Association or the Knights of Columbus; its declared objects were the help of the poor, sick and fatherless and good works in general. The little offshoot of 1913, the ‘Anti-Defamation League’, had by 1947 become a secret police of formidable power in America.*
‘In Doublespeak ‘anti-defamation’ means ‘defamation’ and this body lived by calumny, using such terms as anti-semite, fascist, rabble-rouser, Jew-baiter, Red-baiter, paranoiac, lunatic, madman, reactionary, diehard, bigot and more of the like. The vocabulary is fixed and may be traced back to the attacks on Barruel, Robison and Morse after the French revolution; the true nature of any writer’s or newspaper’s allegiance may be detected by keeping count of the number of times these trade-mark words are used. The achievement of this organization (usually known as the A.D.L.) has been by iteration to make fetishes of them, so that party politicians hasten to deny that they are any of these things. Under this regime reasoned debate became outlawed; there is something of sorcery in this subjugation of two generations of Western men to the mumbo-jumbo of Asiatic conspirators.
‘When the A.D.L. was born in 1913 it had merely desk-room in the parent B’nai Brith office and a tiny budget. In 1933 Mr. Bernard J. Brown wrote, ‘Through the intervention of the A.D.L. we have succeeded in muzzling the non-Jewish press to the extent that newspapers in America abstain from pointing out that any person unfavourably referred to is a Jew’. In 1948 the Jewish Menorah Journal of New York wrote, ‘Should but one phrase in a reprinted literary classic reflect unjustly upon Jews, the A.D.L. will promptly belabour the innocent publisher until he bowdlerizes the offending passage. Let one innocent movie-producer incorporate a Jewish prototype, however inoffensive, in his picture and the hue and cry raised by the A.D.L. will make him wish he’s never heard of Jews . . .
‘These quotations show the growth of the A.D.L.’s power in thirty-five years. It has imposed the law of heresy on the public debate in America. No criticism of Zionism or the world-government plan is allowed to pass without virulent attack; . . .
‘America has today a few surviving writers who fight on for independent debate and comment. They will discuss any public matter, in the light of traditional American policy and interest, save Zionism, which hardly any of them will touch. I have discussed this with four of the leading ones, who all gave the same answer: it could not be done. The employed ones would lose their posts, if they made the attempt. The independent ones would find no publisher for their books because no reviewer would mention these, save with the epithets enumerated above.[7]
‘The A.D.L., of such small beginnings in 1913, in 1948 had a budget of three million dollars (it is only one of several Jewish organizations pursuing Zionist aims in America at a similar rate of expenditure). The Menorah Journal, discussing ‘Anti-Defamation Hysteria’, said, ‘Fighting anti-semitism has been built up into a big business, with annual budgets running into millions of dollars’. It said the object was ‘to continue beating the anti-semitic drum’ and ‘to scare the pants off prospective contributors’ in order to raise funds. It mentioned some of the methods used (’outright business blackmail; if you can’t afford to give $10,000 to this cause, you can take your business elsewhere’), and said American Jews were being ‘stampeded into a state of mass-hysteria by their self-styled defenders’.[8]
An interesting point which Reed made back in the 1950s, and which today is probably more relevant considering the 1984-ish times we’re living in, involved one of the current icons of anti-dictatorship and anti-totalitarianism, Mr. George Orwell. According to Reed even Orwell succumbed in some measure to the then pervasive pressures being exerted on the general public by these agents of one world government. He states:
‘‘Mass-hysteria’ is not only produced among Jews and band-wagon politicians by this method; it produces another kind of mass-hysteria among earnest but uninformed people of the ‘Liberal’ kind: the mass-hysteria of self-righteousness, which is a tempting form of self-indulgence. The late Mr. George Orwell was of those who helped spread ‘mass-hysteria’ in this way. He was a good man, because he did not merely incite others to succour the weak and avenge injustice, but went himself to fight when the Civil War broke out in Spain, then discovering that Communism, when he saw it, was worse than the thing which (as he thought) he set out to destroy. He died before he could go to Palestine and experience any similar enlightenment, so that what he wrote about ‘anti-semitism’ was but the echo of ‘anti-defamationist hysteria’. It is so good an example of this that I quote it; here a man of goodwill offered, as his own wisdom, phrases which others poured into his ear.
‘He explored ‘anti-semitism in Britain’ (1945) and found ’ a perceptibly anti-semitic strain in Chaucer’. Mr. Hilaire Belloc and Mr. G.K.Chesterton were ‘literary Jew-baiters’. He found passages in Shakespeare, Smollett, Thackeray, Shaw, T.S. Eliot, Aldous Huxley and others ‘which if written now would be stigmatized as anti-semitism’ (he was right without knowing it; if written now they would have been stigmatized). Then he suffered what Americans call a pratfall. He said that ‘offhand, the only English writers I can think of who, before the days of Hitler, made a definite effort to stick up for Jews are Dickens and Charles Reade’. Thus he extolled one of the A.D.L.’s ‘Jew-baiters’ as a champion of Jews; in America the film of Oliver Twist was banned because of Fagin! This was the work of the A.D.L.; its representative, a Mr. Arnold Forster, announced:
‘‘American movie-distributors refused to become involved in the distribution and exhibition of the motion picture after the A.D.L. and others expressed the fear that the film was harmful; the Rank Organization withdrew the picture in the United States’. Later the picture was released after censorship by the A.D.L.; ‘seventy two eliminations’ were made at its command and a prologue was added assuring beholders that they might accept it as ‘a filmization of Dickens without anti-semitic intentions’. (In occupied Berlin the A.D.L. ban was final; the British authorities ordered Dickens withdrawn from German eyes).
‘I was in America at this time and thus saw the fulfillment of a prediction made in a book of 1943, when I wrote that, as the secret censorship was going, Chaucer, Shakespeare and Dickens would one day be defamed as ‘anti-semites’. I thought to strain probability, to make a point, but it happened in all three cases: a Shakespearean actor-manager visiting New York was ordered not to play The Merchant of Venice, Dickens was banned, and the defamationists put Chaucer on their black-list.
‘A private organization which can produce such results is obviously powerful; there is nothing comparable in the world. Mr. Vincent Sheehan wrote in 1949, ‘There is scarcely a voice in the United States that dares raise itself for the rights, any rights, of the Arabs; any slight criticism of the Zionist high command is immediately labelled as anti-semitic.’. . .
‘How is the oracle worked? By what means has America (and the entire West) been brought to the state that no public man aspires to office, or editor feels secure at his desk, until he has brought out his prayer-mat and prostrated himself to Zion? How have presidents and prime ministers been led to compete for the approval of this faction like bridesmaids for the bride’s bouquet? Why do leading men suffer themselves to be paraded at hundred-dollar-a-plate banquets for Zion, or to be herded on to Zionist platforms to receive ‘plaques’ for services rendered?
‘The power of money and the prospect of votes have demonstrably been potent lures, but in my judgment by far the strongest weapon is this power to control published information; to lay stress on what a faction wants and to exclude from it all that the faction dislikes, and so to be able to give any selected person a ‘good’ or a ‘bad’ press. [emphasis added. A.T.] This is in fact control of ‘the mob’. In today’s language it is ‘the technique of propaganda and the approach to the masses’, as Dr. Weizmann said, but it is an ancient, Asiatic art and was described, on a famous occasion, by Saint Matthew and Saint Mark: ‘The chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude . . . The chief priests moved the people . . .’
‘In forty years the A.D.L. perfected a machine for persuading the multitude. It is a method of thought-control of which the subject-mass is unconscious and its ability to destroy any who cry out is great . . .
‘The A.D.L. (and the American Jewish Committee) ‘set out to make the American people aware of anti-semitism’. It informed Jews that ‘25 out of every 100 Americans are infected with anti-semitism’, and that another 50 might develop the disease. By 1945 it was carrying out ‘a high-powered educational program, geared to reach every man, woman and child’ in America through the press, radio, advertising, children’s comic books and school books, lectures, films, ‘churches’ and trade unions. This programme included ‘219 broadcasts a day’, full-page advertisements in 397 newspapers, poster advertizing in 130 cities, and ‘persuasions’ subtly incorporated in the printed matter on blotters, matchbox covers, and envelopes. The entire national press (’1900 dailies with a 43,000,000 circulation’) and the provincial, Negro, foreign-language and labour newspapers were kept supplied with, ‘and used’, its material in the form of ‘news, background material, cartoons and comic strips’. In addition, the A.D.L. in 1945 distributed ‘more than 330,000 copies of important books carrying our message to libraries and other institutions’, furnished authors with ‘material and complete ideas’, and circulated nine million pamphlets ‘all tailored to fit the audiences to which they are directed’. It found ‘comic books’ to be a particularly effective way of reaching the minds of young people, soldiers, sailors and airmen, and circulated ‘millions of copies’ of propaganda in this form. Its organization consisted of the national headquarters, public relations committees in 150 cities, eleven regional offices, and ‘2,000 key men in 1,000 cities’.
‘The name of the body which supplied this mass of suggestive material never reached the public. During the 1940’s the system of ‘syndicated writers’ in New York or Washington enveloped the entire American press. One such writer’s column may appear in a thousand newspapers each day; editors like this system, which saves them the cost of employing their own writers, for its cheapness. Through a few dozen such writers the entire stream of information can be tinctured at its source . . . By all these means a generation has been reared in America (and this applies equally to England [and Canada. A.T.]) which has been deprived of authentic information about, and independent comment on, the nature of Zionism, its original connection with Communism, the infestation of administrations and capture of ‘administrators’, and the relationship of all this to the ultimate world-government project.’ [9]
In 1949 Douglas Reed traveled throughout the United States prior to writing his book, Far and Wide, which was his first-hand impressions of America and a final summation of the influences that Political Zionism was having upon the nation to that point. It was to be his final publication prior to the Zionists imposing a general ban on his works which eventually led to a virtual annulling of his name in published circles around the world.
His conclusions though have, as in the case of Insanity Fair again proven to be the most prophetic of the 20th Century in terms of how the Zionist agenda functions and what its ends are designed to produce. As he states in a chapter called ‘Zionism Paramount’, America suffers from ‘three servitudes’: those being the influences of Russian Communism (a product of Zionism) which had infiltrated the bureaucratic levels of government during Roosevelt’s tenure as president; the debilitating effects of organized crime; and the greatest of all, Political Zionism. He writes:
‘The three forces which weaken the whole structure of American public life in effect serve the strongest among themselves, Political Zionism, which stands behind the seats of the mighty while the others work in lesser places, if to similar ends of power-over-politicians. The proof of this supremacy is to be found by a simple test: the extent to which public discussion is permitted . . . At the topmost level, a virtual ban on public discussion of Political Zionism proves the paramountcy of its sway in American affairs. As in England, the open expression of doubt about this territorial ambition, and support for it, has been almost driven underground in recent years. An imperial thrall has been laid on America in this matter. Traditional Americans, whose forebears detested laws of lese-majesty and the genuflections of courts, now find their leaders performing an even humbler obeisance in this direction; like foremost politicians in England, they thus emulate those Rumanian nobles who long bowed to the Sultan’s rule, vainly hoping to keep rank and possessions. The Soviet ban on ‘anti-Semitism’ (which was in effect a veto on public discussion of the origins of Communism) has in practice been extended to the British island and the American Republic in the matter of Political Zionism. It is lese-majesty [i.e. treason A.T.] in a new form and because of it present-day Americans and Englishmen do not as a rule see the grave future courses and penalties to which support of Political Zionism has committed them.’[10]
It takes little extrapolating to see that all which Reed described in his foregoing comments dovetails smoothly with the apparent convoluted, confusing and tumultuous period that we’re now experiencing in global politics. To elaborate further upon that subject must remain the labour of another article and another time. What is essential here is that readers note the connection of events and the fact that the Political Zionists are still very much alive and alert to their diligent and determined effort to destroy the sovereignty of nation-states, serve the interests of Israel and bring in the ill-fated New World Order under the auspices of their original plan, the United Nations.
To these ends organizations such as the B’nai Brith and the A.D.L. have evolved and continue to act as Zionist watchdogs and public censors. It is not surprising therefore that they would eventually attack even those of Jewish decent such as Michel Chossudovsky for Political Zionism’s bold and ambition plans for global dominance owes allegiance only to its proponents and thus their exclusive and racial policies of imperialism continue to pose a direct threat to both the Christian and Moslem world. Our ultimate freedom therefore depends upon our ability to combat this censorship of free speech which continually keeps the occult nature of Political Zionism hidden from the public eye.
————
Arthur Topham is the publisher/editor for The Radical Press. http://www.radicalpress.com He lives in British Columbia, Canada. He can be contacted at [email protected]
* In fact though not in form. The secret police in countries where the institution is native (Hitler’s Gestapo was copied from the Asiatic model, which had a century-old tradition in Russia and Turkey) have their entire power and resources of the state behind them; indeed, they are the state. In America Zionism built the nucleus of a secret police nearly as effective in many ways as those prototypes. It could only become equally effective if it gained full control of the state’s resources, including the power of arrest and imprisonment, and in my judgment that was the ultimate goal.
Footnotes:
[1] The book can be found in the U.S.A. at Abebooks.com and is also available online at the Radical Forum http://www.radicalpress.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1218
[2] Controversy of Zion, Page 242
[3] Dr. Joseph Kastein according to Reed was a ‘zealous’ Zionist historian who wrote the book, History and Destiny of the Jews, (Eng. trans., London, 1933). He is extensively quoted by Douglas Reed in his book Controversy of Zion.
[4] Controversy of Zion Page 243
[5] Controversy of Zion, Page 339
[6] Dr. Chaim Weizmann was a tireless proponent of Zionism. Having supplanted Theodor Herzl as the leader of the World Zionist Organization back in 1904 his influence throughout the formative years of the first half of the 20th Century upon the creation of Israel is well documented. He eventually became Israel’s first Prime Minister in 1948.
[7] Reed had first-hand experience of this practise. In 1952 the Canadian Jewish Congress requested that Canadian booksellers refuse to carry his books.
[8] Controversy of Zion, Pages 340 – 342
[9] Controversy of Zion, Pages 342-345
[10] Far and Wide, Page 274.

{ Comments are closed }

Let’s Talk About Jews And Elections

I’ll make this short. Jews dominate the media period. This is not an anti-Semitic canard, a false accusation, a bigoted remark, or an uninformed opinion. This is an empirical fact. For those out there still in doubt, please read ‘who rules America.’[1] Deconstruct and prove the article wrong if you can, I encourage you to; it will only reinforce the fact in your mind once you realize it’s true. I’ve been accused of anti-Semitism by many different people for refusing to omit the fact that Jews dominate the media in my writings, some people say I should be blaming Zionists, not Jews, but the fact of the matter is, I don’t know whether or not all of the Jewish owners and CEO’s of the major networks are Zionists, but I do know they are ethnic Jews. I’ve been accused of racism [nee white supremacism] for saying that blacks commit more than 50% of the murders every year in the United States, despite the fact that United States Department of Justice statistics prove the same. In other words, I am accused of anti-Semitism and racism for writing the truth. So be it, if telling the truth means that I am a racist and an anti-Semite, I can live with that.
France has a population of sixty million. According to the Jewish Virtual Library,[2] France’s Jewish population is less that 500,000, meaning that Jews compose less than 1% of the French population. Despite this fact, a Jew, Nicolas Sarkozy is now France’s President. His opponent in last week’s election, Segolene Royal, is the ‘life partner’ [meaning unmarried anywhere else] of the Jewish François Hollande, leader of France’s socialist party. To break it down simply, despite the fact that Jews compose less than 1% of the French population, a Jew and a woman married to a Jew composed 100% of the candidates France had to choose from in regards to the final Presidential election. In any case, Sarkozy’s win is being celebrated by Jews worldwide.[3]
Oh come on Maynard, it’s just a coincidence, right? Wrong! In the 2004 US Presidential election, the very same unlikely sampling manifested itself among Democratic candidates ˇ pay attention ˇ this is important. The only real viable choices for Democrats in the 2004 Primary elections were the following:
Howard Dean [Married to a Jewish woman, Judith Steinberg, his children are being raised Jewish.[4]]
John Kerry [Entered the race claiming to be a Catholic until it was revealed that he’s actually Jewish, a ‘surprise’ according to Kerry, but nonetheless a FACT]
Wesley Clark [Jewish according Wikipedia.[5] Clark actually addressed a Jewish group during the election stating ‘I am the oldest son, of the oldest son, of the oldest son — at least five generations, and they were all rabbis.’[6]]
Joe Lieberman [Orthodox Jew][7]
What this means is that 100% of the viable Democratic candidates in the 2004 primary were either Jewish or in the case of Dean, married to a Jew. Now wait, it gets worse.
On the Republican side there was never any doubt that Bush would retain the party’s endorsement. Few would argue today that George Bush is without any doubt, the most Philo-Semitic president this country’s history. Bush has cast aside American sovereignty by stating publicly that he, and therefore the United States [you and I] will back Israel under any circumstances in a mid East war. Bush’s administration has placed more ethnic Jews in highly sensitive positions than any other President in American history, with the possible exception of Clinton, who by the way endorsed another crypto-Jew named Madeleine Albright, who hid here Jewish ancestry[8] in exactly the same way John Kerry and George Allen[9] did. Albright of course was once the Secretary of State where she predictably coddled Israel and did her best to suppress the extent of Israeli crimes committed during the Clinton years.
In regards to Bush and the number of Jews he has appointed to high positions within his administration ˇ see here.[10] Of note is Michael Chertoff, who has what amounts to as one of the most powerful positions in the US government today, he is the Director of Homeland Security,[11] an assignment that places him in a position to do just about anything he likes and then to effectively cover it all up. Chertoff was the primary force behind the illegal arrest, and unconstitutional detention and rendition of the world’s foremost political prisoner today, Ernst Zundel.[12] Chertoff is of course Jewish and a dual citizen of Israel.
George Allen was once considered to be one of the strongest Republican candidates[13] for the 2008 Presidential run; that is until it was revealed that he too is a Jew pretending to be something else ˇ see how Allen responded to a reporter that asked him about his Jewish ancestry ˇ talk about angry][14] Why was Allen so angry? Did the reporter reveal something that ruined years and years of careful orchestration? I think so.
The point of writing this short article is to highlight the very unusual fact that ethnic Jews are over-represented by tens of thousands of times in positions of political importance in the United States. Consider that they represent only 2.5% of the United States population and you’ll understand how it is that I find their disproportionate representation in Presidential primaries highly unlikely. All of us have been thoroughly indoctrinated with the idea that Jews are indeed special and highly ambitious and this is suppose to explain their large showings in politics, academia, sciences, the media, etc I personally think it far more likely that a Jewish stranglehold on OUR media better explains these discrepancies, I am not particularly impressed by their alleged abilities, after all, look around you; is the world really a better place with Jews at the helm?
In the beginning of this article I noted the fact that France now has a Jewish President. I did this solely to point out in the end, that this phenomenon is not isolated to America, it has plagued Europe for decades and is the real reason Europe has passed draconian ‘hate crime’ and ‘hate speech’ legislation which has resulted in the imprisonment of thousands of European patriots. Jewish politicians are the primary force behind the passage of these laws, just as they are in the United States. These Jews hide behind the cloak of other minorities by using them as if they were the crux of concern, but in fact, these laws are designed for no other reason than to prevent exposure and criticism of ethnic Jews and their Supremacist policies/agenda.
Consider the words of Patrick Grimm, noted Internet author, webmaster of Zionist Watch and political dissident as he comments on an excerpt from the Protocols that cannot be conveniently explained away with cries of anti-Semitism and bigotry: ‘Below is just one excerpt from the Protocols that will illustrate to you just how well the Jewish laid plans are progressing along their dire course, the consequences for the rest of us be damned. Oh, but I suppose all the little Jewish civil rights groups would simply label these truths as a ‘canard’, one of their favorite terminologies that they fetch from the bag of tricks when someone turns the heat up. No, it would probably be a ‘blood libel’ as every other foray and examination of Jewish wrongdoing isconveniently named. To read the entire disgusting Zionistic display simply go HERE (and I do advise doing that). Well, here is the excerpt
promised’:[15]
WE CONTROL THE PRESS
4. NOT A SINGLE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL REACH THE PUBLIC WITHOUT OUR CONTROL. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them.
5. If already now we have contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the GOY communities to such an extent that they all come near looking upon the events of the world through the colored glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses; if already now there is not a single State where there exist for us any barriers to admittance into what GOY stupidity calls State secrets: what will our positions be then, when we shall be acknowledged supreme lords of the world in the person of our king of all the world ….
6. Let us turn again to the FUTURE OF THE PRINTING PRESS. Every one desirous of being a publisher, librarian, or printer, will be obliged to provide himself with the diploma instituted therefore, which, in case of any fault, will be immediately impounded. With such measures THE INSTRUMENT OF THOUGHT WILL BECOME AN EDUCATIVE MEANS ON THE HANDS OF OUR GOVERNMENT, WHICH WILL NO LONGER ALLOW THE MASS OF THE NATION TO BE LED ASTRAY IN BY-WAYS AND FANTASIES ABOUT THE BLESSINGS OF PROGRESS. Is there any one of us who does not know that these phantom blessings are the direct roads to foolish imaginings which give birth to anarchical relations of men among themselves and towards authority, because progress, or rather the idea of progress, has introduced the conception of every kind of emancipation, but has failed to establish its limits …. All the so-called liberals are anarchists, if not in fact, at any rate in thought. Every one of them in hunting after phantoms of freedom, and falling exclusively into license, that is, into the anarchy of protest for the sake of protest….’
Grimm concludes with the following:
‘There it is, folks. The ‘We Control the Press’ dictate has already been achieved. In fact, it is now axiomatic that media is a Jewish domain. Their control of our thoughts and ‘ways of thinking’ is a foregone conclusion. When they state ‘If already now we have contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the GOY communities to such an extent that they all come near looking upon the events of the world through the colored glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses,’ we can now safely proclaim ‘MISSION ACCOMPLISHED’ for our Jewish kings, lords and masters! Most Americans see events, people, places and things through Jewish eyes and think ‘Jewishly’ in ways that are probably more subconscious than explicit.’[16]
Wake up America, you are being deceived!
Some good news, according to an article I read this morning, ABC News is reporting quietly, i.e. on their website, not on their television network, that 2.5 million Americans are no longer watching television as they were one year ago.[17] This is indeed a good sign ˇ it reveals that 2.5 million Americans have already woken up!

{ Comments are closed }

The Seeds of Global Tyranny

With the onset of Spring imagery of renewal and the planting of new seed is present in the minds of gardeners everywhere. And, by extrapolation, a similar scenario exists for those of a philosophical nature who perpetually work the inner soils of their being, striving to reap new harvests of perspective and understanding. As one of those philosophers who enjoys the challenge of planting new ideas and hoeing inordinately long rows, my thoughts again shift to the perennial flow of unanswered queries surrounding ‘the Jewish question’ and the unique part that this minor religious sect plays in the cosmic dance upon life’s stage.
Having spent another Winter pondering and debating this question with writers and thinkers, both Jewish and Gentile, there still remains a strong conviction in my mind that the greatest challenge to all the generations of people today, from individual citizens to sovereign nations, is the achievement of a clear consensus of mutual understanding regarding the paramount role that the Zionist Jews have historically played (and continue to play) in the ongoing drama of control and manipulation of the global economy, world politics and the socio-cultural, information paradigm now known euphemistically to seekers of truth as the Matrix.
There are few, if any, of us living today who were around when that fateful sprout we now know as Political Zionism formally burst through its Talmudic encased shell to poke its hydra head out from the fertile and fermenting soils of European society back in 1897. That was when Dr. Theodor Herzl, a Budapest-born Sephardic Jew and Viennese journalist, organized an international conference in Basel, Switzerland to discuss the age-old question of seeking a permanent ‘homeland’ for the multitude of Jews who, ostensibly, had been wandering the earth since their banishment by Rome from Palestinian territory in 70 A.D. The conference took place one year after Herzl published his controversial book, The Jewish State, and it culminated in the formation of the World Zionist Organization, the first of many intentional ‘international’ organizations designed to implement the Zionist’s plan for creating an instrument with which to overthrow and destroy every nation state upon the planet (with the exception of their own, i.e. Israel) and supplant them with a one world government.
The kernel of Political Zionism had lain dormant for centuries, confined, as the bulk of Jews themselves, within the hoary husk prison-cell of the Jewish Talmud a massively ponderous tome of ongoing, manmade statutes and judgments first compiled by the Pharisees after their banishment from Jerusalem. The Talmud was, in essence, the indestructible, stainless steel canister within which the basic tenets of Abraham’s seed were contained and was recognized by the vast majority of Jews as the supreme ‘Law’ over and above the Torah (the Pentateuch or Old Testament of the Christian Bible).
For thinkers of this present time to fathom the depth of relative importance that the Talmud has played in the formation of the Zionist mindset and grasp the overall intent of this chauvinist and racist mental outlook that developed over the past two thousand years is, I suggest, the greatest intellectual and spiritual challenge facing humankind today.
And what of this seed? What garden variety, bug resistant specimen of germ was inserted into the social, cultural and political ground that would, over time, take firm hold and produce such an abundance of mental and emotional foliage that even today a century or more beyond the initial planting the vast majority of thinkers are still blinded and confused by the conceptual camouflage that these premeditated, genetically modified plants have produced?
First, the Big Bucks
In order to deliberately set out to create a global mental monoculture composed of political, social and cultural paradigms the primary prerequisite, as every investor knows, is to have and to hold the generative ‘power of the purse’, a phrase coined and used by the Talmudic Zionist Jews. No endeavor of such proportions could possible have been contemplated on a serious level and then actually undertaken without first ensuring that the requisite financial resources were in place to cover all the potential contingencies that could, and would, arise in a venture of such magnitude. Analogous therefore to this creation of a world wide, intellectual landscape of mono-cultural thinking would be the notion of undertaking a similar project of an agricultural nature without the wherewithal to irrigate and fertilize such a massive scheme.
The capital therefore had to be securely in place beforehand for such a proposition to have any real chance of success and that fundamental factor of the Zionist formula for global dominance took formal root in the fields of Western society when the Jewish banking cartel headed by the Rothschild family of fine bankers finally, through wealth, wile and will, were able to establish their initial foundation for war, terror, strife and mind-control via the collusive devise known as the centralized banking system.
As an aside it ought to be born in mind that while many of today’s students of history are cognizant of the crucial role that the Jewish bankers have played in the unfolding of the Zionist agenda for creating a one world government the vast majority of people still remain ignorant of the fact that the Jews had been playing the money game with nation-states and their leaders for thousands of years, leaving a legacy to the world of nation after nation, destroyed and confounded, from Babylon to Egypt to Greece then Rome to Spain and eventually Russia in the beginnings of the 20th Century. From eastern Europe the Zionists then set their sights upon the New World, the USA in particular.
Using what is commonly known today to researchers on the subject as the fractional reserve banking system, a clandestine, alchemical process of creating gold, not out of lead but out of purely mental concepts, or as some say, ‘thin air’, was to prove, upon assay, to be the most fantastic, yet fruitfully usurious scheme ever devised by man to guarantee untold wealth and power for those whose hands held the strings of this literally bottomless purse.
Metaphorically speaking then this was the first Jewish Modified Organism (JMO) which the Talmudic Jewish Zionists created and from its renewable, revenue producing roots sprang forth a money tree within the boundaries of every sovereign nation of the Western world; a Trojan Horse of such magnanimity and subtleness that once firmly in place it then provided the wherewithal to begin the grand design of what I have referred to elsewhere as ‘the infrastructure of tyranny’* which became the foundation upon which the current era of terror now precariously rests.
The crowning glory of this conspiracy to conscript all mankind into an army of compliant, consumer slaves, after the Talmudic Jewish controlled ‘Russian’ revolution of 1917, was the Rothschild scheme to create a private, central banking system in the United States of America. That feat was accomplished in 1913 when the so-called Federal Reserve banking system was established. With it the Zionist Jews now had a seed tree embedded in the richest soils of the world’s latest and greatest empire at the beginning of the 20th Century. That, as I have suggested, is when the project for the creation of a New World Order first took on a tangible form.
Then, the Mind Conditioning
As every gardener knows, after securing a plentiful water supply, the other essential ingredient necessary for producing an abundant crop is sunlight and to this end the Zionist Jews now turned their attention. With the money (water) in place to irrigate the fertile mental fields of America and the rest of the West the collaborators could now focus on new JMO seed varieties that would enhance their plans for world hegemony. The second of these JMOs was therefore a natural concomitant of the first and one meant to provide the means of communicating to the mass public a program of mind control designed to ensure feasibility of all that was planned for them.
It’s not by mere coincidence that many newspapers have the word ‘sun’ included in their titles. As an example I use the newspaper most widely prominent here in British Columbia, Canada, the province where I reside. It is called ‘The Vancouver Sun’ named after B.C.’s largest city. It is a Jewish, pro-Zionist newspaper, one of many such Jewish newspapers across Canada owned and controlled by the Asper family, and for purposes of illustration, will do just nicely.
If we continue with the gardening metaphor it is easy to see the connection between sunlight (the mass media, or what I refer to as the M3, the Mainstream Mind-control Media), soil (the minds of the general public) and water (the Jewish-controlled money supply).
In order to cultivate crops (generations) of human seedlings which will bear the genetic (psychic) imprint of the specific variety of seed, the fructifying influence of the light source must be established and controlled in order to obtain the highest yield possible within the shortest span of time. In order to accomplish this program the means of communication (the sunlight) must be concentrated in the hands of the gardener and like clockwork for these clandestine horrorculturalists the timers need to be set so that the maximum amount of light (mind-control propaganda) can be beamed down on the mental fields (tabula rasa) of young minds awaiting this negative, nurturing force.
If one is able, by inference, to visualize the process it quickly becomes apparent that the concentration and/or conglomeration of all the major sources of information contained within the media television, newspapers, books, magazines, film, publishing houses in Zionist Jew hands, is pivotal to their primary plan for the creation of a one world strategy of governance.
Just as the sun of nature nurtures her myriad number of offspring, so, from dawn until dusk, by analogy, the Zionist Jew ‘sun’ of their communication networks does likewise and just as we witness the movement of nature’s sun across the sky and note the accompanying motion of the plant in the field that changes and bends its direction continuously so as to accommodate itself to the maximum degree of the given light source so is it possible to see this same phenomenon occurring within the minds of the general public as their collective consciousness is manipulated in one form or another by the degree of artificial light (in the form of ‘news’, ‘information’) which this sacrilegious source shines down upon the people daily (and, if we extend the notion of artificial lighting the process goes well beyond the daylight hours and is actually occurring on a 24-hour global growth cycle that never lets up!)
And finally, the crop
The end result of this conspiracy of conspiracies is what now lies before our eyes today. We see a world torn apart by war, domestic and international conflict, poverty, pollution, injustice and slavery to a capitalist/corporate/Jewish-run economic system that benefits only the obscenely rich Jews and their minority of elitist lackeys chosen from the horde of Gentile men and women who, due to the same spiritual malady of mammon-induced greed, have sold their souls to the highest bidder in a vain attempt to escape the inescapable.
Space forces me to confine this short essay to the highlights of such a metaphor of madness that has taken grip on the world. To document in detail the multitude of offshoots which have sprung forth from the initial seed described above would take a full length book or more. Suffice it to say that the Jewish Modified Organism that we know today as Political Zionism has been altered and recreated, tested and modified and planted over and over for at least a hundred years or more within the laboratories of our social consciousness and political landscape and the varieties and their effects are so pervasive and powerfully inculcated into our daily lives and throughout our mental and material world that only a supreme effort on the part of researchers and thinkers everywhere will reveal the extent to which this phenomenon has developed.
To fall prey to the persuasive arguments which the pro-Zionist forces perpetuate on a routine basis is to be misled and self-deluded to one’s own and one’s neighbour’s detriment. To be consistently cognizant and steadfastly aware of the fact that our primary source of information, the mainstream media, upon which we vainly attempt to calculate and order our lives, is a duplicious mask of falsehood of such grotesque proportions that it boggles the mind upon initial contemplation, is to plant our foot upon a new threshold leading to a greater and more determined awareness of the magnitude of the problems that now beset us as a human race.
God grant that we all become gardeners of the soil of truth and that our collective efforts to extirpate this alien and destructive weed known as Political Zionism will eventually bear the fruit of victory thus allowing our beautiful planet to return to harmony and love, peace and brotherhood/sisterhood. These are the seeds of individual choice that we need to plant with each new Spring.
———
Arthur Topham is the publisher/editor of The Radical Press http://www.radicalpress.com . He lives in rural central British Columbia on a small holding with his lovely wife Shasta, their dedicated Malamute/wolf dog, Sheena and some cats. Arthur has been researching the Zionist issue for a number of years. Feedback is always welcome, both pro and con. Please write to Arthur at [email protected]

{ Comments are closed }

Bad Moon Rising: How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s ‘Hate Propaganda’ Laws by Arthur Topham

Bad Moon Rising:
How the Jewish Lobbies Created Canada’s ‘Hate Propaganda’ Laws
By
Arthur Topham
‘Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them,
I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and
beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
And everyone that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not,
Shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and
Beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.’
~ Jesus Christ, St. Matthew Ch. 7, vs 24 -27

My assertion, as stated in the title to this article, that Canada’s judicial system has been infiltrated and co-opted by foreign Zionist Jew lobby groups operating in Canada since 1919, will automatically be met with a loud hue and cry of ‘preposterous! outrageous!’ followed immediately by much hand-wringing and declamations of ‘anti-Semitism’,’hate’,’racism’ and further punctuated, dramatized and broadcast across the nation via the the Zionist-controlled mainstream media.
So be it. It doesn’t detract one iota from the facts. All such reactionary responses only reinforce the premise of my argument that Canada’s Zionist Jew media cartel is, and always has been, an integral part of their overall plan to formulate and establish Orwellian laws inimical to the rights and freedoms of the people. Frankly stated it’s the modus operandi of these foreign-controlled Jewish lobbies to react precisely in this fashion for that is how they mendaciously twist and stifle debate on any issue of national importance to Canadians; be it our Charter rights or our fundamental right (and responsibility as patriotic protectors of our country) to question the direction of the nation’s foreign policies which, under the current Harper regime, are deliberately replacing the nation’s longstanding principles of common sense and aligning our once relatively respected political ideals with the present agenda of the Zionist Jewish state of Israel, considered by most intelligent people to be the most rogue, racist, supremacist, violent, atheistic and apartheid nation on the face of the planet.
It’s my fervent contention that the template for Canada’s ‘Hate Propaganda’ legislation was, from the start, designed in such a way as to function as a legal shield; a mechanism which the Zionist lobbyists use to defend themselves against any allegations aimed at exposing their covert actions; all of which are meant to benefit their inordinate influence over Canadian politics and the criminal actions of the foreign state of Israel; Harper, of course, being their current Trojan Horse, front man in this deliberate, ongoing, slow motion coup to capture the nation’s political and legal systems.
When we go back in history and retrace the steps that these legal interlopers have taken since the end of World War 2 it’s clearly evident what they’ve been up to, especially in light of the now increasing displeasure that more and more Canadians are showing toward the actions of the Jewish lobbies when it comes to their relentless, telling attacks upon our Charter of Rights and Freedoms which include our fundamental right to freedom of expression as stated in Sec. 2b of the Charter.
For those still unfamiliar with this fundamental right it states:
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.
All that’s required in order to verify this war against our rights and freedoms, including our most basic right of speaking out and expressing our views on issues vital to our national well being, is to delve into any and all of the legal cases over the past forty four years associated with the issue of freedom of expression and one will see immediately that in practically every instance the first special interest lobby group lining up and vying for intervenor status is inevitably a Jewish one. And furthermore, concomitant with their zealousness to intervene is usually the underlying fact that it is they themselves who were instrumental in bringing forth the charges. And if that isn’t the norm then they’re undoubtedly there to make sure that the complainant (usually an agent in one form or another) gets the maximum support of their power and influence in the courts and the media.
The foundation for all of this pretense and deceit was laid at the end of the last world war when the Zionist-controlled U.K. and USA began cranking up their deliberately orchestrated accusations that Hitler and the German military were guilty of having attempted to wipe out the Jews in Europe by gassing millions of them and then cremating the innocent souls in ovens to cover up their horrendously heinous crime. The Nuremberg Trials at the war’s end were the focus of these fantastic claims of willful genocide by gas and fire and the West, still mesmerized by the massive amounts of anti-German hate propaganda which they had been saturated with for the past six years, as well as being shell-shocked from all the fighting, killing, bombing and destruction, fell prey to this massive deception and was unwilling or unable to garner the moral fortitude or financial resources necessary to counter these outrageous lies of the powerful Zionist lobby.
Little did it matter that every confession by the captured German military commanders had been gained by torture. Little did it matter that the majority of those running the trials were of Jewish ethnicity. Little did it matter that laws which had been followed by nations for decades were suddenly revised in secrecy just prior to the war’s end and the former International Geneva protocols cast aside and new standards of jurisprudence abruptly introduced into the equation by Jewish judges and the Zionist forces who had gained firm control of the whole charade. This was the hour that they’d planned for and were awaiting since first declaring war on Germany in 1933 when Hitler and the National Socialist Party gained power through legal, democratic means.
Now that the Allies had gained their victory, the Zionists via subterfuge, deception, political pressure and the willing assistance of their controlled media and Hollywood, were finally in a position to have their long sought ‘6 Million Jewish Holocaust’ footings poured, thus assuring themselves of a firm propaganda foundation for the erection of their fabricated phantasy; one that would then allowing for the rest of the subsequent monkey business of taking over and manipulating national and international laws, all of which was based upon their cunningly crafted pretext for tyranny known as the ‘Holocaust’.
After that landmark lie was accomplished it was merely a matter of time, patient plodding, and endless, inordinate propaganda and pressure placed upon the rest of the population of the world who had still to accept the ‘Holocaust’ hoax and be subsequently convinced of the dire and urgent necessity for enacting legislation that would make it illegal to promote either ‘genocide’ or ‘hatred’ toward any identifiable group.
In principle (and of course based upon the lie of the ‘6 Million’) these proposals might have appeared laudable and worthy had the mythical ‘Holocaust’ actually occurred and in that context they would most definitely have been noble pursuits to accomplish but that, unfortunately, wasn’t the reality. Only now that the real history of the last eighty years is finally coming to light, thanks to the free and open Internet, are we finally getting to see the original, unadulterated script as it was so cleverly designed by the Zionist forces of the day; a program of diabolic, Machiavellian political pragmatism designed to destroy democratic institutions and replace them with a Zionist-based illuminist, occult vision of a macabre New World Order where they, and only they, would hold all the power and control over the world’s people along with all the resources of the planet.
Such was the set and setting here in Canada when the Jewish lobbies started their underhanded campaign to create ‘Hate Propaganda’ laws that would be and are being used against Canadian citizens today.
One might legitimately say that these deceptive measures to control freedom of speech actually began even before the commencement of WW2. After Hitler and the National Socialist Party came to power in 1933 the Jews in Canada were already growing fearful that Canadians might begin to believe what Germany was saying about the International financiers and the Jewish control of their own beleaguered nation and so in the province of Manitoba, (of all places) the government passed a statute to combat what was apparently perceived to be a ‘rise in the dissemination of Nazi propaganda’. The premise of which (The Libel Act, R.S.M. 1913, c. 113, s. 13A (added S.M. 1934, c. 23, s. 1) was later to become The Defamation Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. D20, s. 19(1) and was in all likelihood the first volley launched against freedom of expression.
Up until 1970 Section 181 of the Criminal Code, which reads: ‘Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.’ was the only provision in the Code even remotely connected to the offence of group defamation but it didn’t, at the time, specifically make mention of ‘hate propaganda’.
As stated above, when WW2 ended the work of the Zionist lobbyists began in earnest when their ‘Holocaust’ card began appearing as the foundational pretext to any and all discussions surrounding ‘human rights’ and ‘discrimination’. The first step in the direction of censorship was the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 with its references to ‘hate propaganda’ and by 1953 we find that the Canadian Jewish Congress was already diligently pursuing efforts toward this end with their attempt to insert anti-hate propaganda provisions into the Criminal Code which was being revised in that same year.
Their deceptive labours eventually bore fruit when the lobby was finally able to convince Canada’s federal Justice Minister Guy Favreau in 1965 to appoint a special (interest) committee to look into the purported ‘problems’ connected with the dissemination of ‘hate propaganda’ in Canada.
Surprisingly (not) what became known as ‘The Special Committee on Hate Propaganda in Canada’ and later abbreviated (for propaganda purposes) to the ‘Cohen Committee’ was headed by a Jewish lawyer, Dean Maxwell Cohen, Q.C., Dean of the Faculty of Law, McGill University. While not all members of the committee were Jewish there was one other notable lawyer instrumental in aiding the Jewish lobby in their relentless quest for censorship laws. This was none other than Professor Pierre E. Trudeau, Associate Professor of Law, University of Montreal, soon to become Canada’s Prime Minister.
The committee studied the alleged ‘problem’ from January 29th to November 10th, 1965 and their conclusions called for new legislation that ultimately affected the Post Office Act, the Customs Act, and most critically in today’s context, what is now Section 319 of the Criminal Code, the very same section that’s being used to shut down RadicalPress.com and threaten its Publisher and Editor (me) with a possible two year jail sentence for having expressed opinions and facts on Zionism, Jews and the state of Israel.
My case is designed to be the test case for the Jewish lobbyists working in Canada. Should they win and find me guilty under Sec. 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada then that precedent will undoubtedly unleash a flood of subsequent attacks upon the rest of the bloggers and publishers and writers and artists living in Canada who also see an imminent threat to their freedom of expression encapsulated in this draconian, Marxist legislation designed with malicious forethought to censor truth and stymie any and all attempts to achieve and maintain justice and freedom of speech in Canada.
Conclusion:
Just as the great parable of Jesus Christ regarding the foolish man who built his house upon the sand has come down through history so too has the foolish attempt by those who call themselves Jews to build an occult house of invisible governance upon the sands of deception, usury and an insatiable lust for power and control over their fellow mortals.
Now that the rains of the peoples’ outrageous indignation and the floods of perceived injustice and repression of personal freedoms and the winds of Truth and Freedom are beginning to beat with greater and greater intensity upon the once mighty and powerful House of Zion (thanks to the miracle of the Internet), the underpinnings of this deceptive, age-old hoax are giving way and, should the people continue to unite and persevere in their staunch resistance to and abolition of all the ‘Hate Propaganda’ laws now being used against them then soon, and with great relief and thankfulness, will come the fall of this House of Horrors and a new beginning for those who want only peace and love and justice and brotherhood to reign supreme.

{ Comments are closed }

Gilad Atzmon – NEVER AGAIN

Monday, July 17, 2006
Never Again
Gilad Atzmon
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2006/07/gilad-atzmon-never-again_17.html
The photo at the left [missing here. sorry. ed]is not a pornographic image of a Rabbi giving oral pleasure to a newly born Jewish baby. It is actually Mohel Rabbi Yosef David Weisburg sucking blood from a baby’s penis while performing a circumcision.
(The Jerusalem Post Magazine, Nov. 5, 1976, p. 14)[1]
Just six and a half decades ago, Jews were brutally spat out of Europe. As it happened, when the majority of European secular Jews were totally convinced that the condition of emancipation had finally matured into a comprehensive assimilation, the Nazi Judeocide was there to prove them wrong. Just two weeks ago, when the vast majority of the Israeli people were convinced that Peace was just about to prevail thanks to Sharon’s unilateral ‘peace initiative’, the Hamas and Hezbollah were there to prove them wrong.
And so it happened that Germany, which was nothing less than the promised land for Fritz Haber (the man who invented the WMD), Einstein (once a pacifist, later the man who convinced Roosevelt to allocate funds to the Manhattan Project), Buber (a German patriotic warmonger), Sholem, Benjamin, Adorno and many more, suddenly changed its spots. Within the short space of several years it transformed itself into the bitterest enemy the Jews have ever known. But Germany wasn’t an isolated case. As we all know it wasn’t Nazi Germany or the German people alone who actually exercised the destruction of European Jewry. The industrial homicide was indeed largely administrated by Nazi officers and operators, yet, most European nations willingly submitted their Jews to the Nazis[2]. Whether we like it or not, it was the Europeans who somehow collectively found themselves to be rather enthusiastic about transforming Europe into a ‘Jew-free Zone’.
Rather worryingly it is now evident that the Hebraic people failed to learn their lesson. In their attempt to erect a Jewish national home, namely Zion, they made every possible mistake. Rather than endorsing peaceful manners and loving their new neighbours, they have endorsed and exhibited the most brutal conduct possible. For almost six decades the Israeli army inflicts pain on Israel’s close neighbours in the name of the Jewish people. For almost six decades millions of Palestinians are living in refugee camps in atrocious conditions and the Jewish State does not permit them to come back. For almost six decades the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine are discriminated by the new colonialists.
However, one seems almost compelled to admit it, but it was indeed the devastating impressions of liberated death camps which transformed Zionism from being a very marginal Jewish nationalist racist fantasy into the voice of world Jewry. Yet, it was in 1948, just three years after liberation of Auschwitz when Zionism underwent the transformation from being a nationalist racist philosophy into a murderous reality. It was just three years after the liberation of Auschwitz when Zionists proved beyond doubt that they properly internalised the most devious Nazi tactics, philosophy and precepts. Already then in 1948 the Israeli legislators found themselves engaged in setting racist laws that were no different from Nuremburg Laws. Already then, in 1948, the IDF together with paramilitary groups were practicing some Nazi-like ethnic cleansing strategies. As we happen to learn, the Israeli ethnic cleansing agenda has never faded. Israelis, like their Zionist Elders, very much like their Asheknazi Rabbinical ancestors don’t really like to mix with Goyim. Contemporary Israel is a clear resurrection of the European Jewish ghetto. However, the Israeli ghetto is a vast improvement compared with the old east European Shtetl. In the Jewish State, it is the Goyim who are locked behind walls in places that seem to be no different from concentration camps.
In defence of the post-war Jewish inclination towards Zionism, one may suggest that considering the vast impression of the Holocaust, the collective move towards Zionism was rather reasonable. Being totally traumatised by the scale of hatred against them, Jews all over the world collectively agreed; ‘Never Again’. I know about it all just because I myself was raised on the ‘Never Again’ philosophy.
‘Never Again’ Jews would be led to the slaughter, I was taught year after year in an Israeli school located obviously on occupied Palestinian territory in East Jerusalem. ‘The new Jew’ i.e. Israeli, so they said, ‘would fight back’. And indeed we were ready to fight back. Moreover, we were keen to do so, in the name of the Jewish people, in the name of our history. We were launched to punish the Arabs for our unfulfilled future in lost Europe.
It took me many years to realise that the ‘Never Again’ that was initially portrayed as a moral argument, was actually non-ethical to the bone. It took me far too many years to realise that ‘within the Judeo-Centric universe, ‘Never Again’ means: ‘from now on, Never Again Jews go to the slaughter, instead, it is going to be the Jews who take others to the slaughter. Looking at Beirut and Gaza, this is indeed what Israel is all about: ‘a barbarian political system that is fuelled by others’ pain’.
While Emanuel Levinas, the post-war Jewish philosopher believed that after Auschwitz Jews would stand firmly at the forefront of any battle against inhumanity, discrimination, racism and other malaise of modern civilization, it seems that very much the opposite turns out to have happened. The Jewish State, with the support of their far too many Wolfowitzes and Dershowitzes, became the absolute embodiment of modern evil. Day by day we see the ‘strongest army in the Middle East’ squashing innocent civilians, whether in Gaza, Beirut or Jenin. The Israeli Army is blitzing civilian infrastructure of States that can never defend themselves. You may wonder why did the Israelis have to erase Beirut Airport? The answer is simple – just because they were capable of doing so. The Israelis are indeed thugs, but they are far from being ordinary ones. The Israelis are actually nothing but ‘self loving’ thugs. Very much like the stereotype Jewish mother, they are totally in love with their symptoms. They really have fun flattening their neighbouring countries. Seemingly they have never taken in the possibility that one day, sooner or later they will have to live in peace with all those one billion Arabs around them. Again, thugs always think in the ‘short term’.
I am left puzzled. Just six and a half decades ago Jews were kicked out of Europe. With the support of the United Nations the Israelites had a perfect chance to make the tragedy of their departure into a new peaceful start. They could easily look into their history and learn from their mistakes. Indeed very few did. One of them is Israel Shahak, another is Lenni Brenner. But as painful as it may sound, most Jewish secular institutes and scholars did quite the opposite. They made their past mistakes into their claim for fame. They made the newly-formed Jewish thug, the Israeli, into a cultural icon. In Israel, the thug culture made it into a norm. Time after time, Israelis have managed to vote in war criminals and mass murderers to be their prime ministers. Strangely enough, in the last election, when they were sure that peace was just about to prevail, they had voted a non-military prime minister. Yet as soon as the recent violent crisis erupted, Olmert and Peretz were very quick to use the ultimate military measures. They probably realise very well that arrogance, violence, brutality and barbarism is the Israeli raison d’être.
Sadly, we have to admit that Levinas’s prophecy was not forthcoming. Not only had Jews failed in collectively leading any recognised humanitarian cause, in the name of ‘Never Again’ global Zionism together with the Israeli lobby they are consciously pushing us all into WW3. This time in the name of a cultural clash.
History, Revisiting the Present
The Historian may suggest that knowledge of the past would help us to understand the present or even serve to safeguard the future. On the contrary, I would argue that any understanding of the past is in itself the direct product of the present discourse. In other words, it is our symbolic order currently in place that shapes our vision of any historical narrative. Practically speaking, it is the present carnage in Beirut and in Gaza inflicted by the Jewish State that will inevitably shape our take on Jewish history. The present Jewish State’s brutality will certainly lead towards the total collapse of the official Jewish historical narrative and its dominance in western discourse.
Though Simon Wiesenthal won’t agree, history isn’t merely a collection of some sporadic anecdotes i.e. historical facts, but rather a tale that links anecdotes into an intelligible narrative. Historical Narrative is a message that survives the present discourse and symbolic order. Considering the crude Israeli brutality, the Judeo-centric historical narrative in which Jews are the victims is doomed to collapse. At least dialectically, it is rather fascinating that the ‘Never Again’ attitude, happens to be a self destructive mechanism, a Judeo-centric, historically orientated precept that aims towards the end of Jewish History.
Without referring to the truth value in the Medieval tales of blood libel; without trying to suggest whether or not Jews made Matzos out of young gentile blood, the growing quantity of images of orchestrated murderous Israeli activity helps us to realise where such accusations may have come from. Without suggesting any historical narrative to do with WWII and the events leading to the destruction of European Jewry, it is the current Israeli murderous zeal against its next-door neighbours that may throw light onto the collective European tendency to brutally spit out the Jews. One may sit in front of the TV watching Beirut burning and say, ‘if indeed this is what these barbarians are doing to their neighbours, no wonder why no one wants them as a neighbour.’
It must be mentioned that Jewish collective blood-thirstiness isn’t exactly a Zionist invention. Amos Elon, the author of one of the largest compendiums of Jews in Germany, provides us with a very shocking chapter of Jewish patriotic warmongering to do with WWI. On the eve of the war, Chaim Weizmann, a prominent Zionist and later the first President of the Jewish State, admitted to the British Ambassador in Berlin saying ‘seemingly Jewish intellectuals were the most arrogant and belligerent of all Germans.’[3] Martin Buber, the iconic symbol of left Zionism and Jewish poetic peaceful pacifism, could not stop himself from celebration at the point of departure of the global slaughter. ‘Not in faith but in devotion is the divine revealed,’ said he, the prophet of the Jewish cultural renaissance[4]. ‘For Buber,’ says Amos Elon, ‘the war was a ‘sacred spring’ a wonderful purification through violence, he basked in the sheer moral beauty of it.’ Yes this wasn’t Adolf Hitler but the adorable ‘Zio-pacifist’ Martin Buber. But Buber was far from being alone, during the first weeks of the war even Freud succumbed to the general euphoria: ‘He couldn’t wait to see German troops march triumphantly into Paris.’[5]
Probably the most famous practitioner of poetic hate-mongering was the Jew Ernest Lissauer with his ‘Hymn of Hate against England’:
‘We shall hate you with a long lasting hate.
A hate that endures and will never abate
Hatred by sea and hatred by land
From those who wear crowns and those who work by their hand
Seventy million all as one man
United in love and united in woe
United in hatred of one single foe
England’
James W. Gerard, the American Ambassador in Berlin, reported in his memoirs that German Jews took pride of the ethnic origin of the above-cited sickening hate hymn. But the party didn’t last for very long. According to Elon, ‘the Anti-Semites were quick to turn the poem against Lissauer and the Jews. ‘Only Jews are capable of such hatred.’ Whether this is indeed the case, isn’t for me to judge. Yet, there is something worrying about the rapid transition of some secular Jews into war-mongers (Wolfowitz, Dershowitz), mass murderers (Kissinger, Sharon), and war criminals (Haber, Olmert, and the Israeli society). This is very concerning because Rabbinical Judaism though being far from an ethical worldview is far from being violent, aggressive or even sadistic.
Seemingly, the Israeli, a secular Jew, has managed to kill God. He has managed to set a civil law rather than a civilised one but somehow he failed to defeat the Jewish tribal barbarian zeal. Like Buber, Freud, Deshowitz, Haber, Wolfowitz and Lissauer, the Israeli man loves war (as long as he wins), he is ‘united in hatred of one single foe’ – the Arabs.
The modern Israeli Jew is no doubt a modern man, he doesn’t follow the bible, he doesn’t practice Judaism, he dumped God long time ago but bizarrely enough, he still chops his male baby’s foreskin when this infant is just eight days old. The modern Israeli is circumcising his son, he mutilates his son’s young body following a primitive tribal blood ritual, he lets a rabbi (a Mohel) injure his new born baby and then he watches the very same rabbi to suck the blood from his newly born son’s penis. Evidently, the modern secular Jew may have managed to assimilate but failed in merging into humanity. He is still an active participant in an ancient tribal bloodsucking ritual.
I am not an anthropologist, I cannot determine whether it is exactly the bloodsucking culture that turned Buber, Haber, Sharon, Peretz, Wolfowitz and Kissinger into mass bloodsuckers. But I do know that in my road in London, there are no participants in any ancient blood rituals. Somehow, it feels very safe. I think to myself that it is rather possible that once we enforce or at least convince Israelis and modern Jews to stop celebrating their bizarre rituals they may learn to love their neighbours almost as much as they love themselves. By the time this happens the cultural clash between Jewishness and humanity may be resolved. It is crucial to take into consideration that our collective image of Hamas and Hezbollah as mass murderers and bloodthirsty fanatics is just a projection made by those who happen to be active participants in blood rituals. In Lacanian language the ‘unconsciousness is the discourse of the other’ . In the Israeli practice the murderous inclination the Zionists referring to Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and the Hamas is just a mirroring reflection of Zionist murderous tendecies that are far from being repressed anymore.
The above is far from being an adequate logical or an analytical argument. It is merely a desperate suggestion made by a man who grew up there, in Zion, amongst self loving thugs and bloodsucking Mohels. It is a call made by a man who is trying for many years to get to the bottom of the notion of hatred. It is a call made by a man that was dreaming of playing a concert in Lebanon, a country he visited as a soldier 22 years ago. A country that was flattened to dust but has spent the last two decades resurrecting itself. A country that had a dream, a country that is once again being wiped out by its next door neighbour.
————————-
[1]http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/mohel.htm
‘There are three stages required for the performance of a ritually correct circumcision in Jewish law: the removal of the foreskin; the tearing of the underlying membrane so as to expose the glans completely; and the sucking away of the blood, m’tsitsah.’ Roger V. Pavey. The Kindest Cut of All. Bognor Regis, W. Sussex: New Horizon. 1981. pp. 87-88.
[2] If this isn’t enough, as Hanna Arendt pointed out already in the 1960’s, the Jewish death toll wouldn’t have been as great if not for Zionist and local Jewish leaders actually collaborating with Hitler in such an extensive manner. Seemingly the Hebraic leaders didn’t learn their lesson, rather than endorsing peaceful thinking they have chosen brutal conduct. For almost six deacades the Israeli army inflicts pain on Israel’s neighbours.
[3] Amos Elon, The Pity Of It All, Penguin Books 2004 pg 318
[4] ibid pg 319
[5] ibid pg 318
Author’s note: While rabbinical Judaism refers to circumcision as a spiritual ritual filled with some deep religious spiritual meaning, the secular and assimilated Jews keep performing the blood ritual as a matter of maintenance of the tribal exclusive identity.
———————
Editor’s note: Who can watch as a ‘spectator’ the wanton destruction first of Gaza and now of Lebanon and not feel immediately, after the rage settles down a bit, an enormous and frustrating sense of impotence? It is almost as if such gross, vulgar and indecent violence unleashed against a group of innocent men, women and children is ‘somebody else’s business, let’s just get the Europeans safely out of there’ and we can only just wait for the ‘international community’ to sort it out and in the meantime shake our heads in regret and wash our hands of it all.
Gilad Atzmon isn’t going to keep quiet about it, bless his soul. As a person who spent the first 30 years of his life there, and was raised to be convinced of the righteousness, or at least the reasonability of his country of birth, the land where he served as a soldier, he is well acquainted with the mindset, the policy and the structure of Israeli society. He, as an ‘insider’ can help us to see through the mist of deception and the continual grotesque excuse-making for violent atrocities committed against the Arabs of the Middle East. He is well aware of the violent undertones, which he calls aptly, ‘thug’, in a society where men and women are judged by their racial, religious or ethnic composition and are treated (or mistreated) accordingly. Nothing he says is a secret, it simply doesn’t usually make it through the censors on all sides, who have vested interests either in instability, war or maintenance of a myth.
He is chipping away at the block of ‘Israeli righteousness’ splinter by splinter. It’s possible that no sledgehammer of words will ever make a dent in that stone, because the foundations seem to be sunk quite firmly in the ground, and no matter how he hammers away, the stone seems to grow, the taboo against criticising anything remotely connected to the Jewish State and the driving forces behind it is so immense, that it seems unshakeable. The Western world prefers to look elsewhere but at Israel itself.
It is out of his spirit as a radical lover of life, disgusted by violence, but aware that resistance to an occupier and tormenter is not only a right, but it is a moral duty, that Gilad Atzmon denounces violence against innocent people, and reflects on the roots of that violence, hoping that one day soon, eyes are going to open and people will stop defending by rote violence just because the perpetrators are ‘the good guys like us, civilised Westerners’.
That blind ignorance, the refusal to even look, a total lack of self-reflection and deep self-critique is what will ensure the continued tolerance – if not outright support – for a system that remains in place in order to oppress people and control them, because they get in the way of bigger plans. Atzmon’s war is a war against ignorance, a cry to those who still have enough humanity to listen, that the destruction of other people’s lives is NOT tolerable, for the simple reason that the powerful get away with it by having thoroughly brainwashed the public opinion to look the other way or justify evil. We have been made terrified of speaking out against what is wrong, because we also know that we might be the next victims of the proto-fascist retaliation that comes in a million different guises.
Gilad Atzmon gave back his IDF uniform some time ago, but that doesn’t mean he has left the war. He is now serving the side of justice by showing us that the brainwashing CAN be reversed. He shows the Arab peoples that they are not alone, they will not be abandoned and people are going to support them more and more, even though it might not look that way right now. That sledgehammer he uses is just a laptop computer, and I am sure he knows that writing words is not going to be enough to stop the violence, but hopefully it can blow some minds wide open. Minds that have been sealed by a lifetime of propaganda.

{ Comments are closed }

Open Letter to Chief Justice D. Brennan of the B.C. Supreme Court

[Editor’s Note: The following letter by Robin Mathews to the Chief Justice of the B.C. Supreme Court is a courageous and finely worded challenge to the person in charge of justice for all British Columbians. It’s essential that the questions which Mr. Mathews asks of the Chief Justice are forwarded to as many citizens as possible throughout this province to insure that the courts are made aware of the extent of the general dissatisfaction with the questionable processes and decisions that Mr. Mathews alludes to in his letter. Please pass this letter on to as many of your associates as you possibly can. For the sake of those still living in prison under false charges i.e. Betty Krawczyk and for justice concerning the unnecessary death of Harriet Nahanee consider this request of an urgent nature. Thank you. Arthur Topham, Editor and Publisher, The Radical Press]
—————
Open Letter to Chief Justice D. Brennan of the B.C. Supreme Court
Robin Mathews
520 Salsbury Drive,
Vancouver, B.C., V5L 3Z7,
April 12, 2007.
The Honourable D. Brenner,
Chief Justice,
Supreme Court of British Columbia,
800 Smythe Street, Vancouver,
British Columbia, V6Z 2E1
copies to: Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett, Madam Justice Brenda Brown, Ms. H. L. McBride, The Canadian Judicial Council, Concerned Canadians
Re: R.v. Basi, Basi, and Virk,
Registry No. VA23299
Re: District of Kitimat and Wozney v. Minister of Energy and Mines, the Attorney General of British Columbia and Alcan
Docket L050918
Re: Complaint against Madam Justice Brenda Brown to the Canadian Judicial Council concerning the Court-implicated death by draconian use of ‘criminal contempt’ of court and by the unnecessary incarceration of Harriett Nahanee, aged and ill Native environmental protester. [And the parallel draconian incarceration of Betty Krawczyk, non-Native protester, not addressed in the Complaint].
My Lord:
Law Officer of the Supreme Court of British Columbia H.L. McBride, replying (March 30) to a letter of mine to Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett concerning ‘public access to documents filed’ in the Basi, Basi, and Virk matter, repeated the objectionable terms of the general restriction of documents from public examination imposed by Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm obviously imposed with the approval or consent of judges involved and with your support. That so-called ‘Practice Direction’ has been explained as a device employed to insure the protection of the accused. In my own experience the substance of such documents does not bear negatively upon the accused; rather the denial of those public documents to the public appears to protect those who may be corrupt members of the present and past Gordon Campbell government and other highly placed people possessing political power in the province.
With respect, I submit to you that the so-called ‘Practice Direction’ which is in fact an illegitimate universal gag order is intolerable and is a violation of the freedoms of Canadians to know. I believe an address to the Supreme Court of Canada would see the so-called ‘Practice Direction’ struck down as illegitimate. I believe a process by writ of mandamus might have the same effect. With respect, I believe that any fair-minded person concerned with justice and the freedoms of Canadians would see the present so-called ‘Practice Direction’ as an intolerable, dictatorial, and repressive invasion of the freedoms and the tranquility of Canadians. If you do not see it as that, would you explain to me why you do not?
H.L McBride, in her letter of March 30, 2007, invited me to write to you if I ‘wish to obtain access to other documents which may be contained in the [Basi, Basi, and Virk] court file….’ (1) I wish the freedom to see all documents presently in the court file. Will you grant me that freedom?
(2) I request that you conduct a full review of the repressive protocol and write a letter to me (that may be made public) to state your findings.
In addition, I wish to record two matters with you concerning the behaviour of Madam Justice Bennett. First: in her letter of March 9 to me H. L. McBride wrote: ‘During the hearing [of March 6], Madam Justice Bennett … indicated that she will be establishing a protocol for media and public access to documents filed in this matter. In the future, copies of further documents ordered released may be obtained from the Criminal Registry upon payment of the usual photocopying charges.’
More than a month has passed and no protocol is in place though documents have, apparently, been filed. Since documents have been in the process of being filed for pre-trial hearings for months and months, why is Madam Justice Bennett delaying? Have you or Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm intervened to prevent her from making documents available? When an irrational and repressive system is put in place, as is the case with the so-called ‘Practice Direction’, any suspicion is possible because the essential crudeness of the system invites wide speculation.
Secondly, Madam Justice Bennett has presided in a court in which some of the main characteristics have been obstruction, delay, misinformation, and truculence on the part of some counsel and others outside the court. Why has she not employed threat of sanctions and then the invocation of sanctions misused in the cases of Harriett Nahanee and Betty Krawczyk but appropriate in the Basi, Basi, and Virk matters? Why is the Supreme Court of British Columbia practising, openly, a system of lenient or non-existent discipline for the probably corrupt and the powerful, and another system of penalty and censure more oppressive and harsh for principled, decent, and powerless Canadians?
That question must be answered.
In the matter of District of Kitimat and Wozney v. Minister of Energy and Mines, the Attorney General of B.C. and Alcan (Oct 16-20) you were the judge presiding; your decision was released in March, 2007.
With respect, I submit to you that your decision is wholly invalid and must be wholly invalidated by reason of your being in conflict of interest.
You were, in fact, the presiding judge in an action which saw a recent colleague of yours as a chief respondent; and to put the matter forcibly, Wally Oppal, Attorney General, might well have written the decision for you. That is a way of saying your judgement is so completely a reflection of his wishes in the matter that he might have authored the decision.
For some years Wally Oppal was your colleague in the Supreme Court. When he stepped from a position as an Appeal Court judge into a Gordon Campbell Liberal candidacy, he should have been publicly reproved by you as Chief Justice. As Attorney General of B.C. he could never appear before a B.C. Supreme Court colleague without being himself and placing the judge presiding in a position of conflict of interest.
In the specific case here referred to the Kitimat case you should have declared your unsuitability to preside over the action and you should have sought a judge from outside the Supreme Court of B.C. You did not take that simple precaution . With the deepest respect, I challenge your role in the matter and declare that I do not believe any reasonable and prudent Canadian can accept the judgement you made as an untainted judgement.
A number of matters contained in the judgement you wrote place it very seriously in question, and, I believe, place you in a highly equivocal position apart from the demonstrable conflict of interest. I will not refer to those matters here, now.
Re: Complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council against Madam Justice Brenda Brown concerning the court-implicated death by draconian use of ‘criminal contempt’ of court and by the unnecessary incarceration of Harriett Nahanee, aged and ill Native environmental protester. [And the parallel draconian incarceration of Betty Krawczyk, non-Native protester not addressed in the Complaint.]
As Chief Justice of the B.C. Supreme Court you must know the extent to which so-called ‘court orders’ and ‘injunctions’ (providing bases for declarations of ‘criminal contempt of court) have been discussed by the Canadian Judicial Council and declared to be the kinds of instrument rarely used. You must know, too, that those instruments are frequently used by members of the Supreme Court of B.C. You must know that they are instruments defined by the Canadian Judicial Council in May 2001 as ‘not governed by the rules of court’. That means you must know that a corrupt Supreme Court and any petty despots or servants of corrupt government present in that court may make use of extraordinary powers ‘not governed by the rules of court’ to attack, damage, violate or otherwise harm people not deserving of such action.
Cameron Ward, in his defence of Betty Krawczyk, said that the B.C. government of Gordon Campbell ‘has come up with a creative way of punishing political dissidents. Rather than have people charged with breaking laws enacted by their duly elected representatives, the conventional way of dealing with public order, the government enlists the courts to have objectionable conduct characterized as contempt of court. It does so by encouraging the use of injunctions issued in sham proceedings.’
One must extend the statement by Cameron Ward. What is ‘objectionable conduct’ to the Gordon Campbell circle may be in fact simply the full exercise of freedoms by Canadians. When police are asked to remove gatherings of people expressing political dissatisfaction with policy and with the violation of democratic processes, the result is wide and deep discussion absolutely necessary in a free society. The employment of ‘court orders’, ‘injunctions’ and ‘criminal contempt of court’ in such cases to clamp down on information and debate may be and often is, the use of repressive, anti-democratic, and intolerable behaviour on the part of the Supreme Court and its judges. They should be the defenders of the freedoms of Canadians against plots and manipulations by powerful governments and corporations.
Cameron Ward stated that Betty Krawczyk was victim of an ‘officially induced abuse of process’. Harriett Nahanee, many have suggested, was the murder victim of an ‘officially induced abuse of process’. That any Supreme Court judge in Canada would be a party to such behaviour brings the institution into serious risk of being held in contempt by a large part of the population. Such a situation cannot come to good.
If that is not bad enough, providing very powerful grounds for actions of serious discipline against Madam Justice Brenda Brown, two further, important matters must be set down. When concerned Canadians were told they could get reasons for the judgement against Betty Krawczyk at Criminal Registry in the Supreme Court building, they went there, gathered peaceably waiting for communication, and one of them reports were served with ‘a court injunction which threatened us with arrest’. As Chief Justice and, therefore, chief protector of the rights and freedoms of Canadians in the sanctity of Supreme Court space you cannot but be alarmed at such repressive and coercive behaviour. Please tell me who gave that order. Where is it recorded? What do you intend to do to assure Canadian freedoms in Supreme Court spaces in future?
In each of the matters to which I have referred in this letter you are the Chief Supreme Court officer. In each of the matters to which I have referred, I allege that reasonable and prudent Canadians would find cause for serious unhappiness at the behaviour of court officers and, alas, deep suspicion of their motivations. In each of the matters to which I have referred in this letter a simple question must be asked: are some judges of the Supreme Court of British Columbia and their servants acting to prevent ‘justice’ as that word has meaning to most Canadians, and are those judges knowingly (or even unknowingly) acting in a fashion that supports corrupt, repressive, anti-democratic, and lawless forces in the society?
If the answer to that question is ‘Yes’, then the task of more and more British Columbians will be to sweep the Supreme Court clean, to remove offending court officers, and to restore the Supreme Court of British Columbia to honesty and competence. Such a cleaning will have to take place if you fail to act on the matters I have raised and others of like nature unless British Columbia descends into the condition of a police state in which the highest court openly serves thieves and fascists.
Please examine each of the questions I have asked and please answer each one fully and carefully.
You must be aware that this letter does not arise from any dislike of the Supreme Court as an institution. On the contrary. It arises from deep respect for the B.C. Supreme Court and for all Canadian institutions intended to assure the tranquility of the people and the full and visible operation of judicial machinery when that tranquility is disturbed. It arises, moreover, from a deep understanding of the evil that results from courts that have become the instruments of the corrupt and the greedy for power. The primary intention of this letter, then, is to alert you to very real problems in the behaviour of some Supreme Court judges and to enlist your wisdom, your competence, and your authority in the task of resolving those problems.

{ Comments are closed }

Frank & Helen Speak Out: A Radical Interview with two of B.C.’s most staunch indigenous sovereigntists in their quest for native rights and justice.

[Editor’s Note: The following interview with Frank Martin and Helen Michell aka Telquaa took place back in June of 2001 and ran in Vol. 3 No. 10 of The Radical, Canada’s Activist Monthly Newspaper. Frank and Helen are still very much active in their ongoing struggles with the State, the Judicial system and the police and it is in their interest and that of public awareness that I am running this interview once again.]
———————
Frank & Helen Speak Out
Eddie John, B.C. Land Treaties, Residential School Abuse, Genocide and Native Justice
By Arthur Topham
Radical Reporter
June, 2001

(Original Editor’s Note: Frank Martin and Helen Michell first appeared in The Radical in conjunction with the Ed John scandal which, to date, still remains unresolved. They were two of many native people who had given sworn testimony during the UN-sponsored Tribunal into Residential School abuse which was held in June of 1998 in Vancouver, B.C. I was able to connect up with them while in Vancouver for the’Hearing That Wasn’t’ a phony court set-up designed to slap an injunction on The Radical and six others in order to prevent us from speaking about the issue of Ed John and Ujjal Dosanjh and the Pedophile/Drug Ring cover-up that they are alleged to have been a part of. Frank and Helen were two of the Defendants named in that lawsuit. The interview took place at their home in east Vancouver on Friday, May 11, 2001.)
Frank Martin, Telquaa (Helen) Michell and their family have been in the forefront of the struggle by indigenous peoples of BC to have the issue of treaty rights addressed in a just and equitable manner. Unassociated with any of the government ‘approved’ channels created by the Department of Indian Affairs, the Federal government of Canada and the B.C. Provincial government which have been set up in order to ‘handle’ the land title issues has meant that Telquaa and her husband Frank Martin great great grandson of famed totem carver Mungo Martin have had to operate outside the frameworks that were arbitrarily put in place to insure the eventual loss of traditional unceded native territories.
Like renegades within their own homelands Telquaa, Frank, their family members have fought and died in order to achieve recognition of their inherent rights as the legal owners of this area of land now called B.C. Along with that struggle has been the call for justice to address the outrage, discrimination and police brutality that has dogged their trail for well over a decade now.
For the purpose of this talk we pick up on the ongoing collusion by the trinity of government, church and residential school ‘clones’ who have conspired to steal the land base from Telquaa’s traditional territory known as Maxan Lake located near Burns Lake in central BC. It’s only one of many areas within the unceded territories of this province where the DIA, the Feds and Provincial government, in association with Tribal Band Councils peopled by ‘Red Apples’ i.e. groomed residential school victims willing to sell out to government officials for power, prestige and money, have forced her family off their traditional land base in order to reap the rewards of timber and other resource extraction and at the same time destroy their chances at reclaiming what is rightfully their traditional birthright.
Telquaa and Frank’s struggle against such formidable odds represents, both in a graphic and a microcosmic sense, the overall struggle of native peoples everywhere around the world who are facing the same merciless onslaught by the dominant white culture to steal and exploit their traditional lands while at the same time destroying their ancient culture.
Throughout the turbulent, trying and incessantly violent challenges presented by DIA band councils, police and native ‘goon squads’ that have overshadowed and tormented their lives Telquaa and Frank have remained resolute and fearless in their efforts to achieve justice for their people.
Working as they do, within a reality that the majority of British Columbians would find difficult to grasp, it’s not surprising that Telquaa and Frank’s story has gone unnoticed by the status quo, mainstream media. They challenge that status quo perception of native land claims just as the defenders at Gustafsen Lake challenged it in 1995 and the Sun Peaks protesters and the Melvin Creek protesters are challenging it today. And in a similar manner they have faced the harsh and brutal reactionary responses to their work by every segment of the dominant culture including segments of their own native people. Their story is not a romantic one nor is it a subject that decent white folk would wish to discuss around the evening supper table. It’s a story of survival and pain and endless struggle and it’s a story of courage and hope as well.
The Radical would like to thank Telquaa and Frank and their family for the opportunity to speak with them. It’s our hope that their voices, so often stifled and distorted amid the din and glare of bureaucratic red tape and the modern-day glitz that passes for mainstream reporting, can finally be heard.
Our talk begins with Telquaa showing me the marks on her wrists that she claims were a result of the handcuffs which the RCMP put on her two years ago when she and Frank and their family were returning to Canada after a chiefs conference in June of 1998. Telquaa said that the cuffs were purposely applied too tight and left that way for so long that she was left handicapped to the point where it took nearly two years to be able to use her hands properly for writing or doing her artwork.
Radical: So that incident happened in Oliver, B.C.?
Telquaa: Yes, it was about a week after the Chiefs conference from North and South America which met at Keller Place in June of 1998. We went down and did a rally because I do a lot of ‘No Treaty’ rallies even if I have to do them myself because I’m totally against the B.C. Treaty process. While I was there the Chief from my territory was walking towards me and we stopped and looked at each other and I said to her, ‘You, you’re the one that did my whole family in for the land at Maxan Lake.’ She went out the door and started to call the cops on me.
Radical: What Chief was that?
Telquaa: My own Chief, Maureen Ogden. She’s right beside Eddie John all the time every place you go around Burns Lake and Smithers. She would always be with him when they were doing all the deals that were going on. Every time that she’d have a confrontation with me she’d run to Eddie John about it. So Eddie John knows all about my land fight up north. It ended up in the Supreme Court in Smithers. We have all the court papers from that. It all had to do with Maxan Lake, my land, tribal land, my family’s land.
Radical: What was the outcome of that court case?
Telquaa: We ended up going to New York about it, five of us.
Frank: Me and her and the kids drove out to New York city and went to the United Nations. Eddie John was the Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council Chief at the time and Maureen Ogden was working under him in the council office. The RCMP had evicted us off Telquaa’s land at Maxan Lake because we were doing work with the Elders on their traplines. Telquaa’s family had built a big log home at Maxan Lake. Maxan Lake is way up in the bush. That’s her land.
Radical: Where is that in relation to Prince George?
Frank: It’s west of Burns Lake about thirty miles off of the main highway. When the government was making reservations Telquaa’s Grandfather met with the Royal Commission on Indian Affairs and had them set that land aside. We have the minutes of those meetings. What happened was the Tribal Council took the trapline away from Telquaa’s family and signed it over to people on the council.
Radical: How did they manage to get away with that?
Frank: It was all part of the land claims scam that’s been going on for years. What they’re doing is taking away all the Indian names that were part of the old Potlatch system. It’s a big fraud thing that’s going on. They ended up relocating us and forcing us off the reservation. That’s why we’re in the city. Anyhow, we kept going to see the council because we were losing our kids to the ministry of Children & Families. They were being apprehended and then sent down to the Mormon homes in the city and getting abused. That’s why we say that Eddie John’s responsible for child abuse because those kids were physically abused while in these foster homes. We’ve got nieces and nephews who were abused. Our family was the only family from the community who lost children. So we were targeted but we kept confronting the Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council and tried to have them step in and intervene on our behalf and try to help us get our land back. We went to Indian Affairs ourselves. We got all the documents from the Prince George office. We were told to sue Indian Affairs for all of this because none of us are able to live on the reserve except for old Wally who wouldn’t move.
During that time when all the kids were getting taken away one of them pulled up in a limo by our house on Sardis Street in Vancouver. He was just a young kid. He was talking about ‘them’ taking pictures of him doing sex acts and stuff with older men. That same kid they later sent to jail. Most of the kids ended up in jail. Bruce he’s doing seventeen years for a crime he didn’t commit.
Radical: Who’s Bruce?
Frank: Bruce Michell, that’s Telquaa’s nephew. They ended up railroading him in court. That’s what they tried to do to us too, that’s why we ended up going to New York City. After we got evicted we had no place to go so we said, well, let’s drive to the United Nations. We had gotten an invitation from the Coast Salish people in Washington, USA. They invited us to use their NGO status at the United Nations so that we could make a presentation about what was going on with us up there at Maxan Lake with Eddie John and losing our kids and losing our land and losing lives. I say losing lives because there were accidental deaths that weren’t accidents. That’s why I say that Eddie John should be charged with war crimes because what the Tribal Council has done is an act of war against us, especially Telquaa. She is of the Bear Clan and that, in our tradition means a lot.
Telquaa wrote a story that was printed in the Burns Lake newspaper. She told the newspaper that we didn’t need the DIA, that our people were successful in governing themselves. Her dad had a sawmill and he hired all the guys around the community. And her brothers had a small mill too. They made railway ties and other products. But then they contaminated her dad with TB and they contaminated all the men folk and left the women folk….
Radical: When was that?
Telquaa: My father died in 1959. This all took place around the time when Alcan was moving into the area back in 1952 1953. Later on when Eddie John became Chief of the Tribal Council he was involved in making deals with Alcan. He was into logging the traplines too.
Radical: How is Eddie John involved with the logging of the traplines?
Frank: In Fort St. James. He has a big logging outfit, trucks and everything.
Radical: Is this the only instance that you know of where you say Eddie John’s been involved in questionable activities?
Frank: No. Then six million dollars went missing a couple of years ago and the three guys that were involved with Eddie on that ended up drowning in the river. They said it was accidental.
Radical: So all of the guys who were incriminated in that six million dollar scam drowned under mysterious circumstances?
Frank: Yes. And so Eddie John ended up with all these traplines and then they were logged off. When we were back at Maxan Lake we met with all of the old people and talked about their traplines. We had a whole wall covered with maps of the traplines. It covered the whole territory around Maxan Lake.
Telquaa: We should tell Arthur the story about Eddie John’s uncle.
Frank: Oh, Moses Isaac?
Telquaa: Yes. It was during the time that we were going back and forth to court from Vancouver to Smithers. There were many times that we had to go back and forth and show up on short notice. One day we were coming back from court in Smithers and we had another old man with us and we saw this old man just walking down the highway in Vanderhoof. He had a cane and a long trench coat and a cowboy hat on. He was just walking along and so I said, should I pick him up, should I pick him up? And the old man who was with us said, ‘Don’t ever pass an old man. Pick him up.’ And so we stopped to pick him up and he said, ‘No! I don’t want to get in. I’m walking. I’m walking to Prince George.’
Radical: From Vanderhoof?
Telquaa: Yes. He’d already walked from Fort St. James [a distance of over 40 miles. Ed.] and it was another 50 miles to Prince George. He said he was going there because of something to do with Eddie John. ‘He’s a lawyer and he has to help me. This is my last chance. He’s my nephew and I have to deal with him. It has to do with my trapline,’ he said. He was real mad. And so we picked him up and we drove him to Eddie John’s house in Prince George and Eddie John wouldn’t let him in. Wouldn’t open the door for him or nothing. Finally he came back and he says, ‘He won’t even open the door.’ He was after all the logs on his 220 acre trapline out at Ft. St. James and he was just going to log it without even dealing with the old man.
And so Moses Isaac decided that he was going to run and so we drove him down to Vancouver and he stayed with us for a whole week before he decided he was going to go and get his own place downtown. But during the time he stayed with us he was scared for his life because he believed that he was going to get killed for his land, for the logs on his trapline. So after a week we put him up in a hotel downtown. He was fine when we put him in there. Then, the next day when we went to check up on him he was gone. His room was cleaned out. It was just like the old man had disappeared. A few years later I met someone from his area and I asked her if she knew the old man and she freaked. She ran. She wouldn’t even answer me. So I asked another woman who’s last name was Isaac too and she said that he had died. So I don’t know if they did him in or what. No one said anything about it after that.
Radical: So it was just one day later that you went to see him and he was already gone?
Frank: Yes. He was quite an independent sort of person and I knew that if we didn’t put him up that he would run on us so we put him up at the New World Hotel downtown. It was an Indian hotel, owned by Indians.
Radical: So when the old man disappeared then Eddie John would have been able to go in and log off his trapline?
Frank: Yes, that’s what happened. He had already logged off half of it before the old man had gone in to Prince George to see him.
Radical: Do you know where that trapline area was?
Frank: Not exactly but it wouldn’t be hard to find out. The Wildlife Office in Smithers gave us all our papers. Also an Anthropologist at UNBC who was employed by the Gitsan Wet’suwet’en gave us documents that were related to the stealing of all our Indian names and how many … people died. She was a bit hesitant to give them to us but she did.
Radical: How do they steal the names?
Frank: Through the Potlatches. Because the government always has a lot of money to spend and the band chiefs use that money to buy Potlatch names. It is illegal though but they still do it. If they have a real Potlatch put up by the hereditary Chiefs you wouldn’t see any of those guys around. Anyway what they do is they move in people from other reserves and make them band councilors and Chiefs and then they vote to force the original people off their land. That’s what they did in Telquaa’s area and everyone was evicted. Everyone except for Wally. He stuck it out but he lost all his kids to the state. Welfare took them all away. They use the welfare system on our families quite a bit.
Telquaa: And the courts.
Frank: Yes, her sister was threatened a couple times by them but she stood up against them and fought back. Like I mentioned earlier some of our family were railroaded through the courts and are doing long jail terms in prison as a result. That’s the kind of conduct that we’re having to deal with when it comes to the judicial system. There’s a conspiracy between Shirley Meldrum who’s the Federal Crown Prosecutor who was railroading all of us in court. She’s married to Godfrey Sebastian who’s the Indian lawyer….
Telquaa: He was also the Grand Tribal Chief of the Hazelton Gitsan while the land claims were going on up there and we didn’t know that and we were going to see him when we were trying to get help with what was going on in my territory at Maxan Lake. And there he was all along sitting with Maureen Ogden and Eddie John. All these guys were tagging together and we didn’t know all this. So we’re still up against the same bunch.
Frank: Anyway, we brought all of this information to the attention of the United Nations when we went there and we said that there was a conspiracy to eliminate indigenous people from their traditional territories, that they were committing genocide on us by forcing us to leave our land. We told the court that there was a conflict of interest with respect to our case because of this relationship between the Chiefs and Council. We called for a mistrial because of that. How we originally found out was that while it was all taking place this old man who was attending the trial came up to us in court and said did you know that that person is married to so and so. We had Elders come to court with us because we couldn’t afford a lawyer. We were using Indian law which allowed us to do that.
So when we went to New York City we were told that we could come back and wouldn’t be arrested so we returned. We went back to court and asked for a Stay of Proceedings because they didn’t have any evidence and because of this conflict of interest.
Radical: So they were just been giving you the runaround?
Frank: Oh, yes. For example they kept dragging us back and forth to court for four years over a case where they’d charged us with a Break and Entry (B&E) to the Band Office. What happened was we had set up a meeting through Brian Gardiner the local NDP MP to go along with one of the Elders to pick up his social assistance cheque. When we got to the office one of their Indian goons jumped us and then we were charged with starting a fight and B&E.
Radical: So what about Brian Gardiner? Did he come to your defense?
Frank: No, not really. I was kind of hoping that he would but he just ignored us after that which was too bad because I feel we have a strong case and I still want to sue them for putting us through all the legal hassles that came out of the charge.
Radical: Four years of that? Goodness you folks have had enough experience with the legal system that you could probably open your own law firm? (Laugher from all)
Frank: Well, actually we do get a lot of people coming to us to ask for advice.
So when we got back from New York City we went up north to go to court and then came back down to Vancouver afterwards because the Chief had moved into the big log cabin that her sister had built.
Radical: The Chief moved in?
Frank: Yes, they took it off of the land and put it down on her place and now she’s renting it from herself! You should read those transcripts. They’re committing crimes against us. It’s just a kangaroo court. That kind of justice system is not meant for people like us.
Getting back to that Eddie John guy. I’m thinking about all the kids that got taken away from their families. They’re all grown up now eh. They’re at home now, staying with Mary.
Telquaa: They came home on their own.
Frank: After they turn seventeen they just kick them out of the foster homes because they don’t get anymore money for them. There was another young guy, Phillip. In fact Phillip was the one who came to the house in a limo that one time rolling in dough and saying he had a limo driving him around and a hooker and telling us how he was making his money. They were using him in the sex trade. They were renting him out.
Telquaa: The same thing happened with another kid downtown. He saw us getting on the bus and so he jumped on too and told us the same thing about the sex trade.
Radical: I heard a similar story recently related to Jack Webster the former Talk Show host. Apparently he was in a bar one time and someone came in and showed him a photo of a supreme court judge in a very compromising position with a young boy. What incensed Jack so was the fact that he felt that there was nothing he could do about it.
Frank: Yes. Telquaa tried to go to court for those kids and they told her that she couldn’t have them. They said it would be like they were attached to the end of a rocket because she was always fighting for her rights. So they denied her the right to raise those boys. Two of the boys had asked me. These were Tequaa’s nephews, her brother’s kids. He died down here in Vancouver too. They killed him. They said he OD’d [over dosed. Ed.] but I know they killed him. He wouldn’t have OD’d himself. I knew him. I saw him the day before he died. I went there and gave him a quart canning jar of hot moosemeat soup. The next day when I went to visit him they’d cleaned out his room and said he’d OD’d in the washroom. Why would he be in the washroom when he’s got his own room in the hotel? It didn’t make any sense. They said they found him naked in the washroom. I think that they killed him because he was hooked up with M_ P_ M_ P_ and her and Eddie John kinda grew up together and M_ is a heavy drug dealer selling drugs up north. She’s the runner. She owns three houses in the city here. Just from selling shit, you know like crack and cocaine.
Telquaa: And she’s always got a lot of young men and boys traveling around with her too.
Frank: Our friend Donovan got hooked up with her for a little while too. It was hard to get him away from her.
Wolverine phoned us up recently and told us that he liked what he’d heard from us in the paper and on the radio and then he said that we should go down to the resource centre and get a copy of the war crimes act and charge them with genocide. So we went down there. I have a resource worker who dug it up for us and gave us a copy so I’m consider it. What I might have to do is go out to Lethbridge, Alberta and see Russell Barson. He’s an international lawyer. We’d like to get him to represent us in an international court and get the preliminary hearings going at The Hague. We already have the information, we’re already in the door. The lady Nadia who put Telquaa on the website http://www.dialoguebetweennations.com is our in. Anyone can go to that site and read what Telquaa has to say and they can also make comments regarding our inherent rights. [At this point Frank holds up a drawing depicting a flag and then goes on. Ed.] This was the original flag for B.C. It had the four Clan Chiefs in the corners. When some of us went to look at it in the archives in the museum in New Westminster they denied having it. They said it burned up.
Radical: This was a flag that was used before the whites showed up?
Frank: No, this was a flag that they made when B.C. joined Confederation. They sat down with four of the biggest Chiefs in the territories and ten sub-Chiefs. There’s two ledgers with minutes of those meetings. There’s also four staffs and inside those staffs are maps. There’s also ten medals one of which is in Telquaa’s home. Two of the staffs are in the Shuswap and the Okanagan. So all of these things are starting to come together. That’s why we say No Treaties for B.C. because in that original agreement Native people have sixty percent of all the resources of the province. So that’s why they’re covering it up. As Indians we’ve got a big bank roll and they’re spending it on us. So this is why we’re saying that we can charge them for the crimes that they’re committing against all of us.
Radical: So all these negotiating teams that the feds have set up are filled with people who have bought into this big cover-up?
Frank: Those guys that went to the Residential schools were cloned for this particular reason. The federal government employed what they called ‘social scientists’ to condition our people. They advised the government on how to go about stealing our land. They said take them away from their land base, take them away from their culture, take them away from their language and they’ll be a defeated people and while your at it train some of them so that they will say ‘yes’.
When they held that UN Tribunal in Vancouver back in June of 1998 my Dad, Ed Martin, spoke there. He said, ‘I got a son that won’t conform. And he still won’t conform to this day.’ And then he went on about how they were trained in the Residential schools, how they were dictated to. It was just like the military. They altered these guys to a point where they would do whatever they were told. So I think Eddie John and ten other Indian Chiefs and lawyers were given special treatment at UBC when they were getting their degrees. They didn’t fully pass the tests but they arranged it so that now they would have all these puppets to eradicate our history and to take it out by making these treaties.
Treaties are supposed to be between Nations. If we are going to negotiate treaties then they must be between the Queen not the B.C. government or the Canadian government. My great great Grandfather was Mungo Martin. He carved a hundred and twenty foot totem pole, a replica of which sits near the Planetarium in Kitsilano, Vancouver. If you read the placard you realize that he designed that pole so that it has all the clans, representing all our people as Nations, carved in it. He sent this totem pole to the Queen of England so that she would remember all this. To remind her that we have inherent Rights and that we have to be dealt with as separate and sovereign Nations. The pole that’s here is a duplicate of the original one and it was placed here so that the provincial and the federal governments would also remember these things.
Radical: Maybe it’s time that someone brought the politicians down to view it again so that they might understand?
Frank: So that sixty percent (60%) of the province represents a big pot of money and those guys are planning to keep it unless we stand up and challenge them on it. You see ninety-nine percent (99%) of our inherent rights are recognized by practice. If we don’t practice them we’ll never achieve them. Under International Law they say that the perimeters of our territory go as far as the dialect of our language and that’s the land that we’re supposed to hold and protect. Telquaa has a file of all the Indian names and all the families and the different territories which they go with. That’s our evidence. That’s what shows how our local governments looked after ourselves before the arrival of the Europeans. That’s what the federal government and the provincial government are trying to destroy now by using their judicial system and courts and putting the Elders in old age homes and hospitals.
Radical: It’s very much like what I was recently told by Candace Hall who was working for the Sto:lo Nation in the Fraser Valley. She found out that the government was giving vaccines to the Elders in that community and they were dying off at an alarming rate. When she tried to alert the native population to what was going on she was harassed and intimidated to the point where she finally resigned her position. It appears to be just one more way in which the original culture is being wiped out.
Frank: That’s what those guys do. There was a health centre in Prince George that was a branch of the Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council and they did all kinds of stupid things out of that health centre to the people like sterilizing a lot of the women. Now I think it’s an independent body.
Anyhow, one of the reason why Canada is having trouble with signing all these International agreements like NAFTA and the FTAA is that they can’t claim to be a Sovereign country because of all these unsigned treaties that exist here in B.C. So they’re having real problems with that because we’re making noise and saying look we’ve got rights. The truth of the matter is that B.C. is still Indian land whether you like to admit it or not. And even Eddie John knows that but he won’t stand up for his people because he’s been brainwashed like the rest of them. He’s a Catholic too. They’re all Catholics. They’re all products of the Residential schools.
Radical: What do you see as a solution to this problem of having all the Pope’s puppets being in charge making land treaties for native people in this province?
Frank: You know seventy percent of the native people today are youth and I think they should be empowered to have a greater say in what goes on. They know what the problem is.
Telquaa: All of those middle aged people that went to university in the 60s and 70s should all be eliminated from looking after their people because they’re unfit. The young kids have more brains than they do now so they should step aside and give it back to the youth before anything worse happens than what’s already going on now.
Radical: All in all considered I find it amazing that the two of you are still feeling positive about things after all that you’ve been through. Do you have any plans to eventually get out of Vancouver?
Frank: Yes. Our plan is to take back Maxan Lake. They can’t keep us away from there. We want to set up a Longhouse there. A Council house for the kids. The kids have already formed their council for Maxan Lake. We want to do some independent buildings. Build our own homes. Cob houses and stuff. Many of us are artists and we’ve got plans to market our work on the net. We want to set it up so that we can work with the youth who’ve been taken away from their culture by the current system. It will be a place of healing for all these kids who grew up in foster homes and now are looking at regaining their cultural heritage.
Radical: That sounds like it would be a wonderful thing to have happen.
I thank you both for sharing some of your concerns with The Radical. I know that there is much more that we didn’t get into in any detail but what you’ve told us I think is very valuable to a correct understanding of what’s been going on in this province as far as the land title issue is concerned. I wish you both the best and look forward to working with you in the future.
————-
(Anyone wishing to contact Frank or Telquaa can do so by contacting helen michell [email protected] or The Radical at [email protected] )

{ Comments are closed }

Ukraine: another piece in US-NATO-EU Zionist Jew puzzle

A monstrous crime is being committed in Ukraine right before the eyes of the world and the western media is helping to cover it up and distract the attention of the entire world from the core fact that the events in Ukraine are not a popular uprising but a carefully orchestrated synthetic coup d’état brought about by long entrenched western color revolution infrastructure that was installed by US/NATO/EU to bring about the illegal act of regime change on the sovereign country of Ukraine.
The unprecedented violent actions by the armed insurgents, who openly use deadly force on law enforcement and have set Kiev in flames, attempting to overthrow the government by force, are in fact treasonous crimes against the Ukraine and the people of Ukraine as they are being controlled from the outside and violate all internationally accepted democratic principles as well as all of the internal laws and constitutionally dictated standards of conduct enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine.
It is illegal under international law for any country to carry out measures to bring about the illegal change of the government in any other sovereign state, this includes support of any kind for insurgent forces, the implementation of economic and other measures to pressure the government to step down or dissolve and all other instruments and measures both covert and overt that may be used to bring about what is now popularly called ‘regime change’ by the West and the US Government.
International Law
Overthrowing governments and removing presidents by force is illegal and covered in laws and ruling by bodies such as the World Court and even the International Criminal Court, which has become a mere instrument of the West, however the United Nations Charter is the most important document and widely respected of all of these instruments and one which all countries that attempt to abide by international law attempt to follow.
Under the UN Charter all attempts by the US/NATO/EU to influence the events in Ukraine so as to bring about a resolution that conforms to their own interests are illegal.
The debate over US/NATO/EU meddling in Ukraine and the use of US/NATO/EU military force, economic measures, political pressure and all of the other ‘tools’ they use, including aggressive military attack and occupation, to effect regime changes in countries such as Afghanistan, Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Serbia, Venezuela, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Sudan and the other targeted countries, has conveniently been absent of one key fact: coercive, forced and outside regime change violates basically all of the accepted tenets of international law.
UN Charter
According to Article 1 (2) of the UN Charter developing peaceful international relations based on the ‘principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples’ is one of the founding principles of the United Nations, and by default the UN Security Council. Therefore any attempt by any country to subjugate or pressure another into implementing measures or carrying out an agenda not instigated from within and not in keeping with the will of the people is illegal. The ‘will of the people’ can only be known through referendums and democratic political processes and debates, not through fabricated pogroms in the streets, which the US is expert at organizing. As for pressure on the government, even the implementation of sanctions is therefore illegal as this is done to pressure a government from the outside.
It is prohibited under international law to threaten to use force and Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter states this clearly and requires all UN member states to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of other states. US/NATO/EU have not threatened military force against Ukraine, as they already have their ground force installed as they did in Syria, Libya, etc. but this applies to other countries they have invaded recently.
Article 2 (7) of the UN Charter states clearly that the United Nations and its members have no authority to intervene in matters which are within the domestic jurisdiction of any state (sovereign country). However the US/NATO/EU have gotten around this by implementing and using what they call the Responsibility to Protect. Uprisings and violent demonstrations such as what is happening in Ukraine fall within the definition of domestic jurisdiction, therefore any outside attempt to interfere is illegal.
Armed Insurgents
What is alarming in Ukraine is the violent and militarized nature of what the West is endlessly painting as a legitimate opposition. This portrayal runs contrary to what the most of the world is seeing right in front of their eyes on their TV screens. Even multiple statements by US officials themselves and a recently released telephone conversation between US official Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, show that these are not members of a legitimate internal opposition, but rather radicalized, militarized, trained, planted, funded and supported members of western ‘color revolution’ infrastructure.
The US/NATO/EU continue to egregiously blame the government and are criminally silent when the opposition they support, and in fact planted, murder members of the security forces and policemen. The outright murder, kidnapping and extreme violence against police and security forces should be something that would cause an outcry among police officers worldwide, especially in the US, where their police are given almost god-like reverence, yet the so called ‘international community’ and members of the world’s law enforcement bodies are silent.
Nothing that the insurgents have done would be supported in any US/NATO/EU country or city, yet they continue to call on, threaten and pressure the authorities in Ukraine to not interfere or take required measures. The violent insurgents have made a mockery of law and order and have literally set the capital of a civilized, democratic European country on fire.
Storming, seizing and burning down the buildings which house the instruments and bodies of the state; openly shooting, murdering, kidnapping and falsely detaining members of law enforcement; destroying and setting alight the property of the state and the people; organizing the pogrom we are seeing in Ukraine; violating the law and acting against their own constitution; blackmailing and threatening officials to step down or be compliant and finally promoting policies that are not in keeping with the desires of the Ukrainian people, are all factual aspects of the Ukrainian ‘opposition’. So why is US/NATO/EU openly supporting them?
Business As Usual for US/NATO/EU
In my journalistic work I have attempted to robustly detail for years what US/NATO have been doing in their redesigning of the world’s geopolitical landscape and I cannot repeat this enough, what we are seeing in Ukraine is just another regime change for the West. The tactics they use are always the same, we have seen them and documented them time and again and they continue to be illegal and egregious. Yet they continue with impunity.
All of the regime change actions and provocations that US/NATO/EU have used in Ukraine have been documented and exposed before the fact, yet the US president, EU leaders and their compliant media continue to egregiously stick to their own artificial pre-planned narrative.
The goal was regime change because US/NATO/EU understood that the Ukrainian Government and more importantly the Ukrainian people would not allow their country to be subverted and become yet another US/NATO/EU client state. More importantly this turn to Russia seriously interferes with US/NATO/EU military plans to base US/NATO missiles in Ukraine, evict the Russian Black Sea Fleet and achieve their prime military objective of neutralizing Russia and eliminating Russia’s response to a first strike nuclear attack, which at the end of the day is the goal. The people of Ukraine and the organs of government are just inconveniences for US/NATO/EU and even if the country is completely destroyed and divided, their goal will be carried out. The destruction of the state of Ukraine will in fact benefit the US/NATO/EU and this fact we have seen repeatedly in the last 15 years.
Obama Connects Syria and Ukraine
In comments related to a soon to be released Voice of Russia interview Professor Francis Boyle a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law told me the following: ‘Obama said that the people of the Ukraine should be able to determine their own future just like the people of Syria should be able to determine their own future. So Obama himself linked the two. The strategy is the same: regime change, civil war, destruction of the State. So this elevates the call by the State Department for a transition to a government of technocrats to the presidential level. The cat is out of the bag. Regime Change of the democratically elected government of Ukraine is openly admitted to be USG policy. Even worse than Syria, whose government was arguably not really democratic. Nevertheless as I point out in my book, the demand for regime change by one government against another government is illegal and violates the World Court’s ruling against the United States in the Nicaragua decision (1996).’
Media Failure
The western mass media continues to promote and spread a phony slanted narrative of the events in Ukraine and their attempts have been formidable and almost impossible to counter. This concerns mostly the nature and portrayal of the police murdering opposition which, like the cop killers in the Caucuses, the West portrays as heroes and some sort of freedom fighters.
Again the hypocrisy of the West in Ukraine is resounding and completely obvious, yet they continue with impunity. US illegality and their complete and total disregard for international law continue to stare the world in the face in Guantanamo and worldwide, yet the compliant media has failed as US illegality has now spread like a cancer to include all NATO/EU countries.
It is another black day for the world as we see that the mass media has completely failed and been corrupted in the West. All of the facts surrounding the murderous insurgents in Ukraine and their bloody uprising and the collusion of the Central Intelligence Agency, US/NATO/EU and the West are being conveniently ignored as the subservient media chooses to attempt to go so far as to blame Russia which has from day one made it a point not to interfere.
Nowhere do we see debates going on regarding: the over $50 billion the US has spent buying out Ukraine; the admission by Victoria Nuland of US meddling in her telephone conversation, during which she implicated the head of the UN in US/NATO/EU plans; the training and equipping of the insurgents by US/NATO/EU; the fact that all outside pressure and meddling is illegal nor the fact that if anything similar happened in the West it would in no way be allowed.
Wake Up Call
They have won and Ukraine has fallen. The President of Ukraine has stated he will step down, which was the first call by the US/NATO/EU, when the first encampments appeared on Maidan Square. This was their clear goal and even though we documented it they have won. However what they have in fact done is committed another crime on an international scale.
Will anyone answer for the crime of subversion and for violating the sovereignty of Ukraine? Not likely. Therefore this should be a serious wake up call to all countries of the world, but will it? Also not likely.
What is striking in Ukraine was that it was a democratically elected government, that all of the US/NATO/EU plans were know from the start and that it was still allowed to proceed.
Once again, as we saw in Iraq, Libya and all other countries where the governments have been recently overthrown and the leader executed or otherwise removed (with North Korea being the perfect example) the only protection that any country has from the imposition of US/NATO/EU regime change is quite simply nuclear weapons.
US/NATO Obama/Neo-Con Plans and Impunity
After 9-11 Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz, the then US Deputy Secretary of Defense stated that the US Government is now in the business of destroying countries, executing presidents and changing governments at will.
General Wesley Clark who was the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, took issue with the Neo-Con architects from the Project for a New American Century (LINK 5) and gave testimony that the US planned to overthrow seven countries after 9/11: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
Mr. Clark called the post 9-11 overtaking of the US Government a coup and said it was plotted by Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and ‘a half dozen other collaborators from the Project for the New American Century’. In a report Glen Greenwald cites a US Secretary of Defense Memo which gave even more detail and put a timeframe on the plan: ‘I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office. It says we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.’
Greenwald reported that General Clark was shocked and wrote about the following exchange: ‘And we’ve got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes Syria, Iran [sic], Iraq before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us.’ Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: ‘the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?’.’ Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: ‘the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?’
A New Regime Would Be Illegal
Any regime installed in any way other than trough democratic elections in Ukraine and under the current crisis will be illegal. President Yanukovich despite being weak and some might argue incompetent in maintaining stability in his country, was democratically elected in elections that were recognized by the entire world. This is important to underline.
Even though he was placed in a Catch 22 situation by the West where if he cracked down he would be demonized and if he did not he would be overthrown, his handling of the internal crisis leaves a lot of questions to be answered.
Timing of Ukrainian Coup
It is also important to note the similarities between the timing of the events in Ukraine and the invasion by Georgia of South OssetiaBoth taking place during Olympics and again the words of Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz: ‘… we’ve got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us.’
Ukraine is the crowning jewel and it looks like they will obtain it.
The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at [email protected].

{ Comments are closed }

Justice: Should Arthur Topham Have Sexually Assaulted 23 Women Instead? by Christoper di Armani

That may seem a strange title for an article about our legal system, but after reading about Campbell Ernest Crichton, the former Duncan, BC, physiotherapist who faces charges he sexually assaulted at least 23 of his former patients, it seems to be the correct title.
A February 21, 2014, article in The Province started thus:
A hearing has been ordered in the case of a former physiotherapist who successfully argued he was too poor to pay for a lawyer to defend himself against charges he sexually assaulted 23 female patients.
Last year Campbell Ernest Crichton of Duncan, B.C., had his charges temporarily set aside after a judge found he was indigent and needed a government-funded lawyer for the complex criminal trial.
Anyone following my writings on Freedom of Speech will be well familiar with the case of Arthur Topham, the Quesnel, BC, publisher of RadicalPress.com, an alternative news website.
Mr. Topham currently faces criminal charges under Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada for ‘inciting hatred’ against an identifiable group.
What, you ask, is the connection between Arthur Topham’s Freedom of Speech case and an [alleged] degenerate serial sex offender?
Quite simply, neither man can afford legal counsel for their criminal trials.
In the case of the [alleged] sex offender B.C. Supreme Court Justice Keith Bracken said there was a ‘real and substantial’ risk to Crichton’s right to a fair trial if if did not have legal counsel. As a result of that ‘real and substantial’ risk Justice Bracken ordered Crichton be provided a government-funded lawyer.
Arthur Topham is facing criminal charges for exercising his Right to Freedom of Speech. There is no ‘victim’ here other than a few people whose actions lead me to believe they self-identify as victims. Topham sexually assaulted nobody. He physically harmed nobody. He never forced a single person on Planet Earth to read what he wrote.
Despite those facts Arthur Topham’s right to a fair trial with adequate legal counsel seems unimportant to the very same judiciary that ruled an [alleged] serial sex offender ought to have a government-funded lawyer.
Arthur Topham is not a wealthy man. He’s a modest man living on modest means in his rural home outside of Quesnel, BC. His application for legal aid was denied. His application for government funding under what is known as a Rowbotham Application was similarly denied.
By these standards it is far more important that a sexual deviant’s rights be safeguarded than a man who dared write a few words someone found objectionable.
That is a very dangerous precedent to set.
Sending a man to prison for the words he writes ought to scare the crap out of every single writer in Canada. Sure, today it’s Topham’s views that are ‘politically incorrect’ and therefore fair game for our legal system, but what about tomorrow? Whose views will be deemed ‘incorrect’ then? Who will stand up for you then?
Campbell Ernest Crichton is charged with sexually abusing 23 human beings. That is real, substantial physical and emotional trauma all for one sick man’s own sexual gratification.
There are real human victims.
Arthur Topham wrote an article someone didn’t like. For that the BC Hate Crimes Unit of the RCMP and the BC Attorney General want to send Mr. Topham to prison, while refusing him any chance of a true legal defense.
Shouldn’t we be far more concerned about sexual predators? Nope. We’ll happily pay their legal fees and send that darned writer to prison. After all, ideas are far more dangerous than sexual predators, right?

{ Comments are closed }