Showing posts with label cover-up. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cover-up. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Neo-Nazis, the CJC and Agent Provacatuers
I know that quite a few of us already are aware of this, but hey, I gotta say: Way to go Ezra!!
Canadian Jewish Congress Organised Nazis
A Jewish-Canadian author is in a battle of words with the Canadian Jewish Congress after alleging the organization props up neo-nazi groups to get “hate crime” legislation passed and expand the role of the country’s Human Rights Commission.
Neo-conservative author Ezra Levant claims in his latest book, Shakedown, that the Canadian Jewish Congress hired ex-cop John Garrity to work for the Canadian Nazi Party in the 1960’s. In 1965 and 1966, Garrity was put in charge of membership for the group and organized the dozen or so “rag-tag band of losers” into an outfit that garned a lot of press coverage.
That media attention was used by the CJC to build up a precieved public threat that persuaded Parliament to abridge Canada’s freedom of speech, Levant contends. The CJC, which had been advocating restrictions on free speech in Canada since the 1930’s, used the Nazi Party’s publicity to successfully lobby for the 1971 “hate law” (Section 319 of the Criminal Code). The end result was the enactment of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which “empowers the Canadian Human Rights Commission to deal with complaints regarding the communication of hate messages by telephone or on the Internet.”
Click the link above for the rest of this very revealing article.
It certainly makes one wonder as to who and what are behind these so-called domestic terror groups as well.
It is my opinion that the CJC and B'nai B'rith should declare themselves as agents of a foreign government.
Seems these organisations have a long history of making the trouble they imagine themselves. Problem, reaction, solution.
Edited to add the link to Ezra's own article:
Why Did the Jewish Congress Build Up the Nazi Party?
The above, please read it all - it's Ezra at his finest - contains his response to Bulka's own rant in the Ottawa Citizen:
In 1965 and 1966, the Canadian Jewish Congress helped organize the fledgling Canadian Nazi Party. That sounds crazy, but it's true, and I wrote about it in Shakedown, my new book about Canada's human rights commissions.
In a letter to the editor in the Citizen last week, the CJC's current co-president, Rabbi Reuven Bulka, called my book's description of the CJC's role "fiction." He said all the CJC did for the Nazis was buy them a bottle of rum.
It's true that the CJC did buy drinks for Nazis in the 1960s. That's pretty strange in itself, and I'd like to hear more of Rabbi Bulka's thoughts on spending Jewish charitable donations that way. But the CJC did a lot more than that: they hired an ex-cop named John Garrity to go to work for the Canadian Nazi Party.
Garrity helped organize that rag-tag band of losers, though they never amounted to anything except for fodder for the press.
There were only a dozen active Nazis when Garrity joined them and they weren't really a political party. He called them "harmless misfits," and they were -- their leader, John Beattie, was a nervous, gaunt, unemployed 24-year-old clerk who spent much of his time dodging angry Jews who tried to beat him up. (One of Garrity's jobs was to help Beattie escape street fights.)
Garrity brought more than just rum to the Nazis. He brought with him pretty much the only organizational talent the group had. They put him in charge of membership. Garrity called himself the "Heinrich Himmler" of the party, and a "Nazi leader for the Jewish Congress."
I'd like Rabbi Bulka's thoughts on that, too.
Of course, Garrity helped his paymasters at the CJC, too, giving them information about the names of party members and donors. And when Garrity finally quit the Nazis, he wrote a tell-all about his adventure in Maclean's magazine.
Garrity larded that report with personal insults toward Beattie and the Nazis. But he did acknowledge that they had never done, or even contemplated doing, anything illegal. All of the violence he witnessed was directed at Beattie, usually by Jewish vigilantes. "Sadly, it is the ... anti-Nazi extremists who, in their attempts to destroy Beattie, provide him with most of the publicity he craves. If it weren't for the riots and the assaults and the public protest meetings they hold, there'd be no real news in Beattie," Garrity wrote.
And that is the importance of this story and why I put it in my book about human rights commissions. Beattie hadn't done anything illegal. He was just a loser who believed in a discredited ideology. But the CJC wanted to bring in political censorship laws and I believe they needed to build up the threat to persuade Parliament to abridge Canada's freedom of speech.
Garrity puffed up a group of Nazi nobodies into a national menace, first through organizational support and then through spectacular media publicity. And, sure enough, Parliament enacted section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which censors offensive speech.
That's become a pattern. Twenty years after the Canadian Nazi Party vanished, CSIS, Canada's spy agency, inserted an operative named Grant Bristow into another rag-tag racist group called the Heritage Front.
Unlike Garrity, Bristow didn't play second-fiddle.
He became the boss, turning the Heritage Front into Canada's leading white supremacist group. This time it wasn't just Jewish money that was spent propping up neo-Nazis -- all taxpayers paid for it.
Which brings us to the present day -- and back to Rabbi Bulka and the section 13 censorship law. Canada's largest customer of section 13 is Richard Warman, who has been the complainant in all but two cases heard by the tribunal this decade. The CJC was so impressed that they gave Warman an award.
But, in a stunning human rights tribunal ruling last month, Warman himself was rebuked for posting anti-Semitic comments on Stormfront, a neo-Nazi website, including a message calling Jews "scum." Warman has stated that he was attempting to gather information on real Nazis, but the tribunal called his actions "disappointing and disturbing," and ruled that he risked encouraging more hateful messages himself.
Warman's actions appalled the tribunal, but apparently not the CJC. Just as the CJC did with Garrity, Nazi opponents continue to stir up neo-Nazi incidents -- as if there aren't enough real threats to Jews as it is.
Perhaps Rabbi Bulka can explain that one, too.
Another edit:
I was reading the comments at Ezra's blog, where a poster linked to this:
Dissapporbation: Censorship's Most Powerful Tool and a good little argument put forth by Doug Christie of the perils of 'peer pressure' and the fear of disapproval. Worth a listen.
I think part of true freedom is the freedom within oneself not to concern themselves with what others may think of them, trueness and loyalty to one's own ideals is in its own way a form of spiritual and individual freedom.
Canadian Jewish Congress Organised Nazis
A Jewish-Canadian author is in a battle of words with the Canadian Jewish Congress after alleging the organization props up neo-nazi groups to get “hate crime” legislation passed and expand the role of the country’s Human Rights Commission.
Neo-conservative author Ezra Levant claims in his latest book, Shakedown, that the Canadian Jewish Congress hired ex-cop John Garrity to work for the Canadian Nazi Party in the 1960’s. In 1965 and 1966, Garrity was put in charge of membership for the group and organized the dozen or so “rag-tag band of losers” into an outfit that garned a lot of press coverage.
That media attention was used by the CJC to build up a precieved public threat that persuaded Parliament to abridge Canada’s freedom of speech, Levant contends. The CJC, which had been advocating restrictions on free speech in Canada since the 1930’s, used the Nazi Party’s publicity to successfully lobby for the 1971 “hate law” (Section 319 of the Criminal Code). The end result was the enactment of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which “empowers the Canadian Human Rights Commission to deal with complaints regarding the communication of hate messages by telephone or on the Internet.”
Click the link above for the rest of this very revealing article.
It certainly makes one wonder as to who and what are behind these so-called domestic terror groups as well.
It is my opinion that the CJC and B'nai B'rith should declare themselves as agents of a foreign government.
Seems these organisations have a long history of making the trouble they imagine themselves. Problem, reaction, solution.
Edited to add the link to Ezra's own article:
Why Did the Jewish Congress Build Up the Nazi Party?
The above, please read it all - it's Ezra at his finest - contains his response to Bulka's own rant in the Ottawa Citizen:
In 1965 and 1966, the Canadian Jewish Congress helped organize the fledgling Canadian Nazi Party. That sounds crazy, but it's true, and I wrote about it in Shakedown, my new book about Canada's human rights commissions.
In a letter to the editor in the Citizen last week, the CJC's current co-president, Rabbi Reuven Bulka, called my book's description of the CJC's role "fiction." He said all the CJC did for the Nazis was buy them a bottle of rum.
It's true that the CJC did buy drinks for Nazis in the 1960s. That's pretty strange in itself, and I'd like to hear more of Rabbi Bulka's thoughts on spending Jewish charitable donations that way. But the CJC did a lot more than that: they hired an ex-cop named John Garrity to go to work for the Canadian Nazi Party.
Garrity helped organize that rag-tag band of losers, though they never amounted to anything except for fodder for the press.
There were only a dozen active Nazis when Garrity joined them and they weren't really a political party. He called them "harmless misfits," and they were -- their leader, John Beattie, was a nervous, gaunt, unemployed 24-year-old clerk who spent much of his time dodging angry Jews who tried to beat him up. (One of Garrity's jobs was to help Beattie escape street fights.)
Garrity brought more than just rum to the Nazis. He brought with him pretty much the only organizational talent the group had. They put him in charge of membership. Garrity called himself the "Heinrich Himmler" of the party, and a "Nazi leader for the Jewish Congress."
I'd like Rabbi Bulka's thoughts on that, too.
Of course, Garrity helped his paymasters at the CJC, too, giving them information about the names of party members and donors. And when Garrity finally quit the Nazis, he wrote a tell-all about his adventure in Maclean's magazine.
Garrity larded that report with personal insults toward Beattie and the Nazis. But he did acknowledge that they had never done, or even contemplated doing, anything illegal. All of the violence he witnessed was directed at Beattie, usually by Jewish vigilantes. "Sadly, it is the ... anti-Nazi extremists who, in their attempts to destroy Beattie, provide him with most of the publicity he craves. If it weren't for the riots and the assaults and the public protest meetings they hold, there'd be no real news in Beattie," Garrity wrote.
And that is the importance of this story and why I put it in my book about human rights commissions. Beattie hadn't done anything illegal. He was just a loser who believed in a discredited ideology. But the CJC wanted to bring in political censorship laws and I believe they needed to build up the threat to persuade Parliament to abridge Canada's freedom of speech.
Garrity puffed up a group of Nazi nobodies into a national menace, first through organizational support and then through spectacular media publicity. And, sure enough, Parliament enacted section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which censors offensive speech.
That's become a pattern. Twenty years after the Canadian Nazi Party vanished, CSIS, Canada's spy agency, inserted an operative named Grant Bristow into another rag-tag racist group called the Heritage Front.
Unlike Garrity, Bristow didn't play second-fiddle.
He became the boss, turning the Heritage Front into Canada's leading white supremacist group. This time it wasn't just Jewish money that was spent propping up neo-Nazis -- all taxpayers paid for it.
Which brings us to the present day -- and back to Rabbi Bulka and the section 13 censorship law. Canada's largest customer of section 13 is Richard Warman, who has been the complainant in all but two cases heard by the tribunal this decade. The CJC was so impressed that they gave Warman an award.
But, in a stunning human rights tribunal ruling last month, Warman himself was rebuked for posting anti-Semitic comments on Stormfront, a neo-Nazi website, including a message calling Jews "scum." Warman has stated that he was attempting to gather information on real Nazis, but the tribunal called his actions "disappointing and disturbing," and ruled that he risked encouraging more hateful messages himself.
Warman's actions appalled the tribunal, but apparently not the CJC. Just as the CJC did with Garrity, Nazi opponents continue to stir up neo-Nazi incidents -- as if there aren't enough real threats to Jews as it is.
Perhaps Rabbi Bulka can explain that one, too.
Another edit:
I was reading the comments at Ezra's blog, where a poster linked to this:
Dissapporbation: Censorship's Most Powerful Tool and a good little argument put forth by Doug Christie of the perils of 'peer pressure' and the fear of disapproval. Worth a listen.
I think part of true freedom is the freedom within oneself not to concern themselves with what others may think of them, trueness and loyalty to one's own ideals is in its own way a form of spiritual and individual freedom.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Norman Dodd Interview
Hidden Agenda of the Tax Exempt Foundations
In an interview with Norman Dodd, the 1954 staff director of the Reese congressional special committe to investigate tax-exempt foundations, he exposes the tax-exempt foundations hidden agenda for government.
In an interview with Norman Dodd, the 1954 staff director of the Reese congressional special committe to investigate tax-exempt foundations, he exposes the tax-exempt foundations hidden agenda for government.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Toronto 18, Er... 11?? Penny - this is for YOU!
Guilty verdict stands in Toronto bomb-plot trial, judge rules
A youth found guilty of terrorism-related offences was not entrapped by a paid RCMP mole, and the verdict will stand, a judge in Brampton, Ont., ruled Tuesday.
The decision in the case of the first person to stand trial among the so-called Toronto 18 means a finding of guilt now becomes a conviction.
"My conclusion is that there has not been entrapment," Ontario Superior Court Justice John Sproat said in his 51-page decision. "There has not been an abuse of process."
The youth, who was 17 at the time of his offences and cannot be named, was found guilty in September of helping, and taking part in, a terror-related organization.
Sproat said at the time that evidence the terrorist group existed was "overwhelming."
I put this up for Penny, who is wrapped up in American Pie right now, but hopefully she can do something with it on her blog, a she has already compiled alot of info about this fake terror cell.
This is such a joke, it would be laughable if peoples lives were not concerned.
Crazy - carpets you say?
ugh.
A youth found guilty of terrorism-related offences was not entrapped by a paid RCMP mole, and the verdict will stand, a judge in Brampton, Ont., ruled Tuesday.
The decision in the case of the first person to stand trial among the so-called Toronto 18 means a finding of guilt now becomes a conviction.
"My conclusion is that there has not been entrapment," Ontario Superior Court Justice John Sproat said in his 51-page decision. "There has not been an abuse of process."
The youth, who was 17 at the time of his offences and cannot be named, was found guilty in September of helping, and taking part in, a terror-related organization.
Sproat said at the time that evidence the terrorist group existed was "overwhelming."
I put this up for Penny, who is wrapped up in American Pie right now, but hopefully she can do something with it on her blog, a she has already compiled alot of info about this fake terror cell.
This is such a joke, it would be laughable if peoples lives were not concerned.
Crazy - carpets you say?
ugh.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
It's Official: FBI got their Man - Ivins Guilty
Well, isn't this nice! The FBI has formally announced that they 'got their man' and Ivins was the sole perpetrator behind the anthrax mailings, which killed five people and sickened 17.
I guess there is no more to be said! The package is wrapped, the bow tied neatly.
Or, is it? There are still many questions which remain unanswered. For instance, the benonite lie and the odd notes associated with the anthrax letters themselves.
As Glen Greenwald notes here:
UPDATE II: The Boston Globe's Washington Bureau Chief, Peter Canellos, today examines the way in which the anthrax attacks were used to increase the nation's fear of Islamic radicals generally and Iraq specifically, and he writes:
When the anthrax attacks occurred, Iraq was immediately fingered by some experts and many neoconservative hawks as a possible source; ABC News quoted three unnamed government sources as saying the powder in the letters matched the type produced in Iraq.
Even though most serious analysts were highly skeptical that the tainted letters came from Hussein, the mere possibility that Iraq could have maintained a stockpile of anthrax was enough to convince many people that it was a looming threat.
The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin notes that article and adds: "So who told ABC the powder looked Iraqi? Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald has been asking that question for days." How much longer will ABC News and Brian Ross be able to refuse to address these questions?
Well at least the blogs ARE asking the questions that the Mainstream seems to overlook.
Even the WaPo, who did at first sound some alarms, then 'scrubbed' it's own article:
Article Casting Doubt on 'Anthrax Killer' Scrubbed
Left out of the Saturday story was the fact that Ivins had NO access to 'dry' anthrax - only liquid. Hmmmm... then we see on Sunday that many of the questions from the Friday article return.
All this to and fro certainly leaves one scratching their heads.
Glaringly obvious is the attempt by mainstream media to cover up the doubts, cast them in a different light and continue to tow the party line: Ivins guilty - case closed.
How convenient.
I guess there is no more to be said! The package is wrapped, the bow tied neatly.
Or, is it? There are still many questions which remain unanswered. For instance, the benonite lie and the odd notes associated with the anthrax letters themselves.
As Glen Greenwald notes here:
UPDATE II: The Boston Globe's Washington Bureau Chief, Peter Canellos, today examines the way in which the anthrax attacks were used to increase the nation's fear of Islamic radicals generally and Iraq specifically, and he writes:
When the anthrax attacks occurred, Iraq was immediately fingered by some experts and many neoconservative hawks as a possible source; ABC News quoted three unnamed government sources as saying the powder in the letters matched the type produced in Iraq.
Even though most serious analysts were highly skeptical that the tainted letters came from Hussein, the mere possibility that Iraq could have maintained a stockpile of anthrax was enough to convince many people that it was a looming threat.
The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin notes that article and adds: "So who told ABC the powder looked Iraqi? Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald has been asking that question for days." How much longer will ABC News and Brian Ross be able to refuse to address these questions?
Well at least the blogs ARE asking the questions that the Mainstream seems to overlook.
Even the WaPo, who did at first sound some alarms, then 'scrubbed' it's own article:
Article Casting Doubt on 'Anthrax Killer' Scrubbed
Left out of the Saturday story was the fact that Ivins had NO access to 'dry' anthrax - only liquid. Hmmmm... then we see on Sunday that many of the questions from the Friday article return.
All this to and fro certainly leaves one scratching their heads.
Glaringly obvious is the attempt by mainstream media to cover up the doubts, cast them in a different light and continue to tow the party line: Ivins guilty - case closed.
How convenient.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
More doubts on Ivin's guilt
This just keeps getting worse. From the patsy Ms. Duley (or is she really an agent?) to the outright hype in the newsmedia - it's starting to smell worse than a dead fish on black pavement in 100 degree heat.
At least one mainstream outlet however, is actually raising some doubts:
Sydney Morning Herald
Yet colleagues and friends of the vaccine specialist remained convinced he was innocent. They contended that he had neither the motive nor the means to create the lethal powder that was sent by mail to news outlets and congressional offices in 2001. Mindful of previous FBI mistakes in fingering others in the case, many are sceptical that the FBI has it right this time.
"I really don't think he's the guy. I say to the FBI, 'Show me your evidence,"' said Jeffrey Adamovicz, formerly of the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases. But investigators are so confident of Mr Ivins's involvement that they have been debating since Friday whether and how to close the seven-year-old anthrax investigation. The move would amount to a strong signal that the FBI and Justice Department think they got their man - and that he had died, excluding the possibility of a prosecution.
Futher on a nieghbour of Ivins also expressed her own doubts on whether or not the man was guilty.
Let's get this straight now: The FBI hounded every scientist in the lab since 2002. They already falsely accused Hatfill and forced a taxpayer payout for their unfounded allegations. Onto the next subject: Ivins. Who now, has apparantly commited 'suicide' by tylenol and codienne.. okay, sure.
Meanwhile, they still ignore the man who actually was in the lab after being fired!!
Seriously folks you can't make this shit up!
Where is Dr. Zack? Does anyone know???
At least one mainstream outlet however, is actually raising some doubts:
Sydney Morning Herald
Yet colleagues and friends of the vaccine specialist remained convinced he was innocent. They contended that he had neither the motive nor the means to create the lethal powder that was sent by mail to news outlets and congressional offices in 2001. Mindful of previous FBI mistakes in fingering others in the case, many are sceptical that the FBI has it right this time.
"I really don't think he's the guy. I say to the FBI, 'Show me your evidence,"' said Jeffrey Adamovicz, formerly of the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases. But investigators are so confident of Mr Ivins's involvement that they have been debating since Friday whether and how to close the seven-year-old anthrax investigation. The move would amount to a strong signal that the FBI and Justice Department think they got their man - and that he had died, excluding the possibility of a prosecution.
Futher on a nieghbour of Ivins also expressed her own doubts on whether or not the man was guilty.
Let's get this straight now: The FBI hounded every scientist in the lab since 2002. They already falsely accused Hatfill and forced a taxpayer payout for their unfounded allegations. Onto the next subject: Ivins. Who now, has apparantly commited 'suicide' by tylenol and codienne.. okay, sure.
Meanwhile, they still ignore the man who actually was in the lab after being fired!!
Seriously folks you can't make this shit up!
Where is Dr. Zack? Does anyone know???
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)