The Lies They Tell about Arthur Topham: A Thinking Person’s Query

Arthur Topham

An acquaintance wrote to me the other day genuinely seeking answers regarding her concerns about my support for Arthur Topham, as she had been reading some very disturbing things about him. She wondered if I agreed with Arthur on the things they wrote about him.

She expressed her concerns in a thoughtful and respectful manner, pointing out that even though, as she says, “I don’t necessarily agree with or understand your stance on the holocaust Monika”, she supported me in my struggle to maintain participation in public life in Jasper. She asked me directly because in her words, “I know you have the courage to speak what you see as the truth.”

Her concerns emanated from the reports on CBC news and Canadian Jewish News that Arthur Topham said “Jews should be sterilized”.

Here is part of my response.

Dear _(her name)_,

I am so grateful to you that you have asked me these questions, and are willing to listen. You are one of the very few who do so. Most people just take the things they read at face value and make assumptions about me that I have become some kind of deranged thing that has fallen off the deep end.

I would like to address the allegations being made against Arthur Topham. He now has no way of defending himself from these false allegations, because he has been silenced as part of the sentencing in the spurious “hate speech” trial in which he was found ‘guilty’ on one count and ‘not guilty’ on another count for the exact identical charge. One day he was anti-semitic, the next day not.

Yes it is true that the mainstream media (MSM) declares as “fact” that Arthur Topham called for the sterilization of all Jews. Seldom have I seen a better example of how the truth gets turned upside-down and inside-out, on something that I know first-hand. And this is at a time when he has been silenced. So it is up to people like myself to set the record straight. Thank you for the opportunity to do so, for at least one person – yourself. In this war, the psychological war that is being waged against us, it is one by one by one that we resist and fight back by trying to open the eyes of thinking people everywhere. Arthur Topham is a hero in this struggle, and he pays a heavy personal price for his courage.

Okay, so to address the question of what Arthur did or did not say.

In 1941, a Jewish man by the name of Theodore Kaufman from New York wrote and published a book called Germany Must Perish! This book was quite widely acclaimed by various major newspapers of the day, and one can assume from that, that it was widely available at the time. In his book, Kaufman makes the case that German people are so bad, so inately violent and militaristic and evil, that they must be annihilated off the face of this planet forever. He outlined a method which he regarded as more humane than simply killing the Germans by execution or bombs. He proposed that 20,000 surgeons be hired, to sterilize all males up to 60 years of age, and females up to 45 years of age. Within three years, the sterilizations would be complete, and within 2 generations, voilà, no more German people.

Why was the original book not condemned? Why did it receive accolades?

German-hating propaganda had been conducted already since decades before WW2 even started. So the world was already tuned in to hate and fear the Germans.

After the war, the book was largely forgotten and was not talked about much anymore. Until Arthur Topham brought attention to it. What Arthur did was provocative, sure, but sometimes that is what is needed to bring attention to a matter of great injustice. He created a parody, or satire of the book by putting on his website the exact same book (or major portions of it), word for word identical, but with Germany replaced with Israel, and Germans replaced with Jews. That is it. The book titles appeared side-by-side on his website, with some kind of preamble which made it clear to any thinking person that this was a satire to draw attention to the original genocidal screed.

The concept of satire/parody was brought out at length at his trial in Oct 2015 which I attended. It is puzzling to me that the jury still found him “guilty”. But it is not that surprising, given that we have all been subjected to a life-time of mind-contamination by the many many lies and subversive undermining of our culture. The jury members were also heavily influenced by the judge’s concluding remarks, and how the judge was treating the defence versus the prosecution side during the two weeks. He was not at all neutral, and it came across in hundreds of little ways, all adding up to a very skewed trial. The judicial system is quite rigged by the very same group of people who bring us all the deceptions in the first place.

The same group of people own and control the MSM. I used to think the CBC was fabulous, and that I could learn so much from the CBC. Nonsense! They are among the worst. The characterization of Arthur Topham is a clear example of how they twist the truth. In this case, they simply leave out the context of the parody, and there it is! In black and white. And he cannot speak now to defend himself and set the record straight. And of course the MSM would not give him any ink anyway, just like the Jasper Fitzhugh does not give me the right of response to the vicious attacks against me in that paper.

You might ask, who is that group of people that I am referring to. You could call them the Bankers, or the Israel-Firsters, or Organized Jewry, or the Rothschilds, or the Zionists. I do not include ordinary street-level Jews in this. Most of them have had a double dose of indoctrination and don’t know what is being done in their name. Some of them do actually get very upset when they find out, and write good books. An example is Gerard Menuhin, son of famous violinist Yehudi Menuhin, who wrote Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil.

I am so glad you reached out to me. I can also see that I have my work cut out for me. Because like I said, very few people will actually ask the questions or want to engage on any subject outside of “how’s the weather?” Where do I begin, how do I reach those who just shut me out? I don’t and I can’t. I simply go on holding my head high, and go on radiating a friendly disposition. Which, by the way, is always genuine. Knowing the truth gives me my peace and my inner strength.

Psychological warfare is far worse than guns and bombs. That might sound extreme, but a nation can recover after bombs, but can we recover from the insidiousness of psychological warfare? Can we (the generic we) still think? Or do we participate willingly in our own destruction? (As in believing that the courageous truth-teller Arthur Topham is evil, instead of listening to what he expressed peacefully. Or in the community shunning and vilifying Monika Schaefer instead of paying attention to what she is expressing peacefully.) We can watch the film or read George Orwell’s futuristic book, called 1984, and think about what he was telling us all those years ago in 1948. He was, by the way, an MI6 agent, so he knew. His book was a warning to us.

Happy Easter to you!

in Peace and with Love,


Jasper in the Spotlight: Where Local and Global Affairs Meet

Original publication of this article is in the American Herald Tribune.

Rights and Wrongs in Syria and Canada

by Professor Tony Hall


winter scene of Jasper Townsite within Jasper National Park

In Double-Double: 12 Months a Refugee lawyer Reham Al Azem looks back over her experiences culminating in her first year of life as a “permanent resident” in Canada. Through the intervention of the Anglican Church, Ms. Al Azem along with her parents came to reside in the town site of Jasper National Park. The March 30 issue of Jasper’s Fitzhugh newspaper includes an essay describing Ms. Al Azem’s reflections on her family’s departure from Syria and the trio’s subsequent adjustments to life in their newly adopted land.

In telling the story of the move from Syria to one of Canada’s most famous alpine parks, Ms. Al Azem shares many poignant observations and anecdotes. One aspect of her account that I believe requires some contextual analysis is the very pronounced position she has taken in condemning the government of the elected Syrian President, Bashar Al-Assad.

Ms. Al Azem’s contempt for those in charge of the Syrian government is palpable. As the author sees it, the Syria she left behind has “a corrupt legal system” where many “innocent friends and family members” were being improperly arrested. She reserves especially harsh verbal venom for the Syrian militia who she accuses of imposing its will on Syrian citizens “regardless of the law or people’s rights.” She writes, “It seemed, in Syria, the sound of money was louder than the sound of human rights.”

Ms. Al Azem’s critique of the Assad government emerges in the course of her account of an episode involving a van that crashed into the window of a Damascus café injuring the author’s mother, Omayea El Marawi. The importance of this episode in the Fitzhugh essay is underlined by the publisher’s decision to include a photograph of the decisive car crash said to have set in motion the refugee saga.


In describing her juridical efforts to hold the driver of the runaway vehicle responsible for the injury to her mother, Ms. Al Azem presents a litany of recriminations against Syrian officialdom including members of the police and the judiciary. She sets her comments against a grim picture of shortages and deprivations in her native land. “There was a lack of jobs, electricity was limited, cooking gas was sparse and heat for our home was hard to come by.”

Ms. Al Azem neglects to mention that the difficulties she encountered in Syria unfolded in the context of wartime conditions. In this war, our own Canadian government has taken sides with other Western countries, puppet regimes and proxy armies to advance the goal of overthrowing the elected and legitimate government of Bashar Al-Assad. There is much evidence to demonstrate that the rather secular and pluralistic government headed up by the current president commands the loyalty of the largest part of the Syrian citizenry. Among his most enthusiastic supporters are members of Syria’s Christian minority. Bashar Al-Assad’s most vicious enemies are especially hostile towards Syrian Christians.

A new threshold in the illegal assaults on the government, people and sovereignty of Syria was crossed on April 6, 2017 when the government of US President Donald Trump mounted a tomahawk missile attack on a Syrian military airport. This armed invasion marks an unmistakable act of illegal aggressive warfare. The unproven allegations given as justification for the attack showed every sign of the engineered deceptions that are emblematic of the psychological operations integral to the perpetration of the so-called Global War on Terror.

The escalating severity of the foreign-backed efforts to overthrow the Assad government and destroy Syria in its present form extends the cycle of Western-backed and Western-perpetrated violence pointed at Muslim majority countries including Iraq, Libya, Sudan, and Yemen.

The unqualified Western backing given to the hugely reactionary, repressive and anti-democratic monarchy of Saudi Arabia, a major consumer of the West’s high-tech weaponry, is an indicator of the hypocrisy and double standards animating the Middle East policies of Israel and the NATO countries including USA, Turkey and Canada. As the people and government of Syria are being pummeled, so too the civilian population of Yemen is being subjected to a huge onslaught of weaponized Western aggression channeled through the elaborate military apparatus of Saudi Arabia.

Contextual Considerations

Of course this commentary on the contextual framework of “Double-Double: 12 Months a Refugee” should not be understood as a criticism directed at Reham Al Azem and her personal reflections. Of course Ms. Al Azem has every right to comment as she sees fit on her experiences and perceptions of life in Syria and Canada. Indeed, her essay makes a significant contribution in helping to bring to light some features of the instigated migration currently transforming the human geography of many polities right now.

My critique in this matter is more directed at the publisher of the essay rather than at its author. Craig Gilbert is the Publisher of the Jasper Fitzhugh, a division of Aberdeen Publishing LP whose president is Robert W. Doull. These media executives opted not to introduce Ms. Al Azem’s important narrative with an overview of what has been happening in recent years to drive people out of Syria, Iraq and other countries in the region. Moreover, the Fitzhugh publisher has opted not to share with Jasper’s citizens any other personal narratives that look at what is going on in Syria from any perspective different from that of Ms. Al Azem.

The result is Ms. Al Azem’s story assumes an inflated significance that suggests her perspective is somehow representative of all sensible and law abiding Syrian citizens. Such is decidedly not the case. Generally speaking the mainstream media has ignored the perspectives of the millions of Syrian people who have chosen to stay put and defend their country from foreign-backed invasion. The big media conglomerates tend to demean the shared humanity of those who have chosen to back their own Syrian government. These Syrian patriots have chosen to pull together across many ethnic, religious and ideological lines to prevent Syria from falling prey to the same kind of horrific fate visited on Libya after NATO’s vanquishment of Gadaffi.

By providing only a single window into the internal dynamics of the Syrian conflict, the Jasper Fitzhugh is adding to the distortion of public understanding of some very complex realities. This purposeful blinkering of public perceptions aids and abets a particular agenda of Canadian domestic and foreign policy in ways that are entirely consistent with more pervasive patterns of media deception. This genre of misrepresentation is currently left to run almost completely unchecked in many of Canada’s highly biased and conformist venues of mass communication.

The rigidness of this system of propaganda and thought control is causing discerning students of public affairs to turn away in droves from discredited mainstream media venues. Too often the institutional backing is not there when conscientious journalists attempt to speak truth to power. On the big issues of war and peace, life and death, dominant media venues tend to line up with the military-industrial banking cartels that control Western governments. As demonstrated by the covert and overt involvements of our governments in the Syrian war, our political leadership is deeply implicated in an intense deluge of illegal actions and stunning deceptions. The magnitude of the international crimes committed in this surreptitious way far exceeds the severity of the crimes that Ms. Al Azem attributes to the Syrian government.

Truth and Deception

Some Canadian journalists have tried to present a remedy to address the most prevalent lies and distortions regularly presented as fact in the Western media. One such journalist is Eva Bartlett. She has achieved major distinctions internationally exposing the hype and disinformation that has sadly become the mainstay of much mainstream reporting on the Syrian war. Ms. Bartlett, who speaks Arabic, counters the propaganda by reporting her own eye-witness accounts of what she sees happening on the ground in the main theatres of conflict.

Mark Taliano is another emerging star of Canadian investigative journalism with a specialty in the Syrian debacle. A retired high school teacher from Southern Ontario, Taliano has recently published a short book, Voices From Syria. In it Taliano draws on his travels to Syria where he conducts many interviews with Syrian decision makers and regular folks. His analysis is also based on his deep reading of many primary and secondary sources.

Aspects of Taliano’s critique of the mainstream media’s role as agents of propaganda can easily be applied to the Jasper Fitzhugh’s very selective treatment of the Syrian war. Ms. Al Azem’s hostile attitude to the elected government of Syria just happens to be in perfect alignment with a main message of the psychological warfare division in the West’s deadly campaign to eliminate the Assad government. The coalition pushing the “regime change” scenario includes the Persian Gulf monarchies, Israel, NATO along with the West’s Takfiri proxy armies.

Both Bartlett and Taliano draw upon an extensive body of evidence to demonstrate that the heavily armed entities in Syria regularly described as “terrorists” in the mainstream media are in fact proxy armies. They are financed and armed by state entities dedicated to the overthrow of the Al Assad government. These much-hyped bands of armed mercenary soldiers go by many names including Al-Nusra Front, ISIL, Daesh, Al Qaeda, Jaish al-Fatah and Ahrar ash-Sham. The failure of the mainstream media to tell the truth about the backstory of “terrorism” in Syria is widely replicated by controlled media such as the Jasper Fitzhugh.

Put simply, there is no shortage of credible sources sprinkled throughout the Internet to illustrate that the very Western powers supposedly fighting “the terrorists” have in fact recruited, trained, armed, financed and directed these same mercenary pawns. This mobilization of paid proxy armies who have been well rewarded to inject an Islamic dimension into the West’s imperial wars began with the CIA-s creation of al Qaeda in the 1980s.

It is well documented that al Qaeda was part of the US-assembled group to advance the policies of US President Ronald Reagan by militarily undermining the Soviet-backed regime in Afghanistan. For thoughtful observers the US government’s deployment of al Qaeda as a proxy force in Afghanistan and now in Syria should raise alarms about the Western establishment’s claim that al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden were the main culprits of 9/11. How is it that the US government is currently sponsoring the very group it still alleges are the perpetrators of 9/11? Does this deployment of Takfiri fighting forces to topple the Assad government fit into a larger plan to balkanize the Middle East and prepare the ground for the invasion of Iran?

Psychological engineering forms an integral part in the Global War on Terror. The engineering of public opinion and attitudes depends on the mass media’s maintenance of tight prohibitions against any sustained analysis of the important role played by the West’s mercenary proxy armies flying Islamic flags. The West’s psychological warfare is pointed largely against its own western populations. The unrelenting media disinformation has created a toxic mental atmosphere with the goal of eliciting public consent for abominations likes Trump’s missile assault on the sovereign people and government of Syria. Will Jasperites, Canadians and decent men and women throughout the world go along with this very clear violation of international law?

As Taliano sees it, too many of us have been lulled into complacency by a corrupt media that fails to give the necessary illumination to the great issues of war and peace, life and death in the global community. He asserts, “most Canadians unfortunately, remain captured by the propaganda and have become immune to publicly available evidence-based research.” Referring to the Western backing of the very same entities the West claims to be fighting, Taliano continues, “Our proxies slit throats, chop heads, and take no prisoners as we in the West waffle in indecision and take the comfortable easy road of believing the labyrinth of lies promulgated by Western media messaging.”

Human Rights and Intellectual Diversity in Jasper

In expressing her contentment with her decision to move with her parents to Canada, Reham Al Azem comments that “peace is where you can defend your rights if there is a threat to them.” Is the Fitzhugh a champion or an opponent of the very rights Ms. Al Azem extolls? Is Jasper a place that embraces or demeans the right of Canadians to enjoy safety and security in our own homes; where we the citizens can express ourselves clearly in accordance with the principles of free speech as well as freedom of conscience, religion, conviction, and assembly?


In the same March 30, 2017 issue that contains the “12 Months a Refugee” essay, the Fitzhugh’s publisher exposes his hostility to the rights of one Jasper citizen. Through the gift of musical acumen, this Jasper citizen, Monika Schaefer, has for almost four decades contributed enormously to the community life of her mountain village. A violin teacher, Ms. Schaefer has performed voluntarily for appreciative audiences in schools and old folks homes as well as in countless benefit concerts. One of the concerts at which Ms. Schaefer performed was devoted to raising money to help bring Ms. Al Azem and her parents to Jasper.


By publishing a letter attributed to one “Paul Brooke” of North Vancouver British Columbia, the publisher of the Fitzhugh extends broad latitude to an individual living far from Jasper to defame Ms. Schaefer in full view of her home community. Brooke’s slanderous attack culminates in a statement where Ms. Schaefer is told her residency in Jasper “is a privilege, not a right.” The Vancouverite’s condemnation emanates from his criticism of Ms. Schaefer for giving voice to interpretations of World War II history that do not conform with mainstream viewpoints.

If the policies and opinions of Jasper’s Fitzhugh toward Monika Schaefer are any indication, perhaps Ms. Al Azem might reflect on the apparently conditional nature of respect for human rights in her adopted community. Perhaps the means for “protecting her rights” are not as solid and entrenched in Canada as she thought.

The limits on respect for human rights in Jasper arise in the context of a Canadian society that apparently grants a lot of latitude to those who seek to prohibit, ban and systematically defame citizens that express interpretations discordant with mainstream orthodoxy. Jasper advertises itself as a place where diversity is respected. As the smear campaign against Ms. Schaefer demonstrates, however, the reality of antagonism towards intellectual diversity in Jasper is very different from the town’s slick PR slogans and images.

In their response to Ms. Schaefer’s controversial video entitled Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About the Holocaust, some key members of the community are demonstrating a marked hostility to the ideals of free expression. Instead of creating venues for the rational discussion of competing narratives, some have chosen to dramatize their disagreement with Ms. Schaefer by blocking her from obtaining licenses and accessing certain businesses and cultural venues. Rather than stand up for the protection of human rights, the publisher of the Fitzhugh has opted to lead the dark enterprise of ritual defamation.

If the powers that be are guided by the principle that living in Jasper is a privilege, not a right, who will qualify for this privilege? Will all residents of Jasper as well as its businesses and clubs be subjected uniformly to an ideas test to see if they qualify for residency privileges? What would be the criteria for such a test? Who would administer it?

Would the Fitzhugh and its publisher qualify for residency? Would their apparent hostility to the principles of free speech as articulated in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms be held against them? Will those responsible for transforming the Royal Canadian Legion in Jasper, an important venue for live music, pass the privilege test?

Will the self-appointed ideological commandants that own and operate CoCo’s Café in Jasper qualify? What is to be said of their claim that vendors in Alberta have full discretion to express their prejudices by refusing to do business with any group or individual they opt to shun? Will those in charge of Jasper’s Habitat for the Arts be held accountable for the exclusionary treatments meted out to Ms. Schaefer? What is the effect on artists, of subjecting their creative endeavours to tests for intellectual conformity to prevailing ideas?

Who in Jasper are the most aggressive violators of the very rights whose attractions apparently motivated Ms. Al Azem and her parents to move from Syria to Jasper National Park? Is there truth to the proposition that one can know the true rulers of a society, by identifying the parties one is not allowed to criticize?

Tony Hall:writer


After the article was published in the American Herald Tribune, I sent the link to numerous local contacts in Jasper, with this message: “Here is a deeper analysis of local affairs in the global context, a timely article by Professor Tony Hall.”  I received the following sneering remark from Dr. Mark Addison.

Monika , your recent article on the Syrians in Jasper could possibly have had some credibility, however, after your previous statements regarding the holocaust, nobody believes anything you say anyway. 

I subsequently thanked Mark for engaging with me and told him I was pleasantly surprised. I pointed out to him that I was not the author of the article. I thanked him for the compliment of thinking it was me who authored it. I told him that Professor Anthony Hall is a historian who has been studying these issues for a very long time.

I wonder though if by mere association, Dr. Addison believes that anything my friends or associates write cannot be believed either. Interesting concept. It is, after all, one of the effects of the practice of ritual defamation, where evidence and truth matter not.

Inside the Eye – Live

Monika Schaefer was a guest on Dennis Fetcho’s Inside the Eye – Live, April 8th, 2017.

They discuss what led to the creation of the short video “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the holocaust”.

Monika describes her awakening to the reality of historical lies. She goes on to describe her experience with “ritual defamation” which continues to this day. Interview is 46 minutes long.


Reality Inversion – Targets of Hate are called the Haters


Jasper’s weekly newspaper called Fitzhugh has become the channel through which vitriol and venom towards this Politically-Incorrect writer has been escalated lately. They have scant regard for fair journalism in the form of providing proper context and the right of response or for fact-checking.

A few weeks ago I wrote about the Town Council meeting at which I made a presentation about the unresolved busking issue. It seems that the moment things appeared to be looking up for me, someone got busy contaminating the good will which was present at that meeting. Immediately I felt hostilities rising, both on the street and in the Fitzhugh. The article about the meeting certainly was skewed in that it did not reflect the tone of the meeting. Amazing how that happens when certain parts are suppressed and others elevated and taken out of context.

Week after week since mid February, the assaults in the paper continued. The culmination of it was the March 30, 2017 newspaper which carried yet another letter by a person who lives far away from this little town of 5000, someone who is unknown to this community and really has nothing to do with this town. Why is he so interested in defaming me? He claims to be Paul Brooke from North Vancouver.

A little context for this letter is the article from the week before, in which I learnt that a defamation lawsuit has been filed against me. That was interesting news to me.

Every single sentence in this letter is highly crafted for maximum damage to me, and psychologically targeting the community to do more shunning – they have been too nice!

Dear editor,

I just read your article in the March 23 edition of the Fitzhugh concerning Daniel Gallant and Monika Schaefer.

I’m delighted to see Daniel Gallant’s court challenge against Schaefer, and congratulate the Fitzhugh for excellent and responsible reporting.

Until recently, there has been an understandable tendency in Jasper to overlook or downplay the Schaefer story.

The vast majority of Jasper residents are tolerant, peaceful, and responsible citizens, who don’t harbour and publicly promote radically hostile, extremist viewpoints.

Everyone is entitled to their own private beliefs and opinions, but not to shove them in other people’s faces like Schaefer has done.

Her carefully crafted image as “just a peaceful little old lady who wants freedom of speech” simply doesn’t accord with the known facts.

Her public association with known extremists, anti-Semitic websites and international neo-Nazi groups is evident to anyone who takes the time to look.

Schaefer has drawn negative international attention to herself and the town of Jasper, tarnishing the image of a truly great community by her presence.

She seems to relish her self-imposed status as a persecuted martyr of historical revisionism and the extremist alternate right.

She doesn’t seem to get the fact that living in Jasper is a privilege, not a right.

Paul Brooke
North Vancouver, B.C.

Wow! What can I say? Well, like a friend of mine says, it is just so over-the-top, it kind of speaks against itself. Who is he? Why does he target someone in a little community so far from where he lives?

That was a sample of our friendly neighbourhood newspaper.

On the Street

today's special

I had an interesting experience the other day. My friend and I went for breakfast at Coco’s Cafe, a place that I had not frequented since before my fateful Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the holocaust video. I have to admit that I was a little curious how the proprietor would react to my presence. I had a feeling that she would not be neutral towards me and that she might have strong feelings either very positive or very negative. She wasn’t there when we ordered and had our large breakfast. We enjoyed some quiet conversation and left.

Just outside the door, I looked up and lo-and-behold there was the proprietor walking straight towards us. I smiled at her and said “Hi Lynn!” There was no smile coming back at me, but just a silent glare, all the while marching towards us while we were standing in front of her Cafe. When she was about to disappear through the door, I said “We just enjoyed a lovely breakfast in your place!” This was genuine, with not a hint of insincerity.

Lynn stopped in her tracks, squarely faced me, and declared: “Monika, you are not coming back into my restaurant! You are not welcome here, you are not coming through these doors again. They (the servers inside) just didn’t know. It would be a conflict of interest for me to let you eat here!”

“Conflict of interest?”, I asked in disbelief. “Conflict of interest?”

“Yes, conflict of interest. I am on the board of the Legion.” As though that should explain everything and be the most natural thing in the world. Well perhaps in Jasper it is natural, where the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 31 president Ken Kuzminski has declared me persona non grata on their premises, ever since early last summer.

My friend Tony Hall told Lynn that she had just subordinated her restaurant business to the thought police business. She retorted that the law says she can serve whoever she wanted, and by extension refuse service to whomever she chose. That was that. She disappeared through the door, leaving us standing there, jaws dropped, quite in shock.

at Coco's Cafe

This was in their window for “Pride Week”. No irony here?

Dear Arthur,

The world owes you an Apology and a great big Thank-You.

First the Apology. For ten years of harassment, invasion and intrusion, and a giant legal battle. All for telling the truth. In a world where truth and lies are inverted, in a world where everything is turned upside-down, your truth-telling has been deemed a crime.

Now the Thank You. Your principled and valiant truth-telling , unwavering in the face of huge obstacles, has been momentous! You have enlightened and inspired untold many of us. The ripple effect of your work will grow into a tsunami of Light and Truth.


Great Truth Teller Silenced, but Message is Unstoppable

Arthur Topham of Quesnel B.C. has been sentenced to silence for now, after a 10 year legal battle. His crime is that he fearlessly wrote about the state of the world in his online website, and that was just too much for the Zionist Powers to bear.

Those who feel threatened by a peaceful man expressing his views online are obviously very nervous and afraid. If there was nothing to hide and if these online publishings were so erroneous as they would like us to believe, this group would not feel threatened. Arthur Topham would simply be ignored. The reaction alone should be enough to trigger people to question: what is it that is so taboo to say?

Trying to stop the truth from coming out is as futile as if you were trying to drink the lake dry to prevent drowning in it. Even the modern-day book burnings cannot succeed in vaporizing the truth. The truth is emerging at an exponential rate, and these desparate attempts by the Powers-That-Be to silence truth-tellers are a show of their panic. 

Danger? For Whom?

Continue reading

Political Dissidence – in the “West”? Thought Crimes, Book Burnings and Jewish Power.

Growing up in Canada, this seemingly utopian country, during the 60s and 70s, I did not conceive of the possibility that political dissidents or prisoners could even exist here. I was aware of political dissidents being imprisoned in far away dictatorships, under tyrannical regimes. But here, we had freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and we had government for the people, by the people and of the people.

Or so I believed.

Several events have converged in the last two weeks which truly are breathtaking, conjuring up George Orwell’s powerful novel entitled 1984. We thought that was a science-fiction horror book and film. Little did we know that the MI6 agent was giving the world a warning.



In my last post, I mentioned the fake media reports that Alfred Schaefer had been charged in Germany. I wondered then if it was a case of “calling the shots”, or perhaps an attempt at intimidation. I had also wondered if it was similar to the 5 dancing Israelis caught “documenting” the 9/11 event, in other words, they had foreknowledge of the event. Continue reading

Dresden: Germans who Mourn their Own are Labeled “neo-Nazis”

From February 13 to 15, 1945, American and British bombers unleashed a devastating firestorm on the beautiful city of Dresden. There were no military targets, and the city was overflowing with German refugees fleeing westwards from the invading Red Army. The commanders of the Allied Forces knew full well that the city was full of women, children, the old, the injured and refugees, in other words, all civilians. Architecturally and aesthetically, this had been one of the most magnificent cities in Germany. The Allies laid it flat and set it on fire.


The authorities today in Germany (Dresden mayor and other officialdom) do everything they can to downplay the destruction of this beautiful city 72 years ago. Not only do they screech “neo-Nazi” about those who dare to commemorate the German victims, the authorities have reduced the number of dead to a ridiculously low “up to 25,000”, easily an order of magnitude lower than the real figure. The mayor has gone on record as saying that Dresden was not innocent, thereby he justifies the Allied bombing of the German city.

Is this behaviour normal? Is the mayor mentally ill? Or does it reflect the behaviour of a puppet in an occupied country!

Alfred Schaefer observed this about an “official” event in Dresden on 11 February 2017:

We listened to an official commemoration at one of the big grave yards, and this is what they told us there: The day after the bombing of Dresden on February 13, 1945, the last of the jews were deported from Dresden to be exterminated. They said that without turning red in the face, without twitching. The holocausted Germans from Dresden are accused of having nothing better to do than round up the last jews and deport them, the day after they had their own city burnt and destroyed. Amazing audacity.

Continue reading

Addressing Town Council on Busking and Thought Policing

Sven & Janice

Tuesday February 14, 2017, I was finally given the opportunity to address the Jasper Mayor and Councillors at their Committee of the Whole meeting. Busking was on the agenda. Dave Baker and Marianne Garrah of the Habitat for the Arts had submitted their report on the “Busking Pilot Project” which they had administered.

Background on last summer’s controversy can be found in this post from August 2016, and several other posts on this blog related to the busking matter. In short, I was denied a busking permit in 2016 because of my “Sorry mom” video, in other words because my conclusions about what actually happened during WW2 do not conform to the mainstream Hollywood version of history.

Dave Baker and Marianne Garrah of the Habitat for the Arts spoke first, to summarize their findings and recommendations in the Busking Pilot Project Report. The most important point they made was that vetting of buskers should be based on talent alone.  This was, in my view, a tacit admission that they erred last summer when they Continue reading

A Reply and Challenge to Ben Gadd

Back in December, Ben Gadd responded to the shock expressed by a mutual friend about my expulsion from the Jasper Environmental Associaton (JEA). A small sample from Ben:


Holocaust denial is a federal offense in Canada, a serious crime. It’s hate speech, not free speech. That’s because it’s a particularly virulent lie promulgated by anti-Semites. And anti-Semitism, as we all know, has resulted in the hate-sparked deaths of millions of people over many hundreds of years. Hate crimes of all sorts occur in Canada, and they are not tolerated, especially this one. Nor is the public expression of the hateful beliefs that fuel such crimes…

The following letter by Rocky Notnes seemed like a natural and logical reaction to a situation by a person who apparently is not affected by all the control words which are meant to elicit a certain programmed response. He penned this letter after learning that I had been expelled from the JEA. 

December 17, 2016
Dear JEA members
This is Rocky Notnes from the Entrance ranch near Hinton. Some of you will know me through the Alberta Environmental Network over the past 30 or so years.
Some, if not all of you probably also know that I wrote a letter to the Jasper newspapers, which was published in both, defending Monika Schaefer’s right to free speech re the holocaust. So my stand will not be news to you.
When I learned that she was expelled from JEA for her views as well as almost everything else I was quite surprised and disappointed. It seems like JEA have jumped on the anti-Monika bandwagon with most of the people in Jasper in what seems to have become a stampede. It is as if people are trying to distance themselves as if they think they are guilty by virtue of just knowing her.
I have known Monika before and after and I do not see her having changed, other than speaking out on an issue that obviously is taboo! While I am not a “holocaust denier” as it is called now, I find your, and others in Jasper, reaction appalling. It seems to me that if members of the JEA felt so strongly about it they could have issued a statement that they do not support Monika in her views. That’s all.  But this is democracy “in reaction”, not “action”!
I feel the same way about Elizabeth May and the Green Party,,, they could have issued a statement disassociating themselves from her views. But to boot somebody out for expressing a view, regardless of the topic, when she has been an upstanding member of the community all her life is, going over the top, in my view. 
Regards, Rocky Notnes

The following day this rather patronizing diatribe came from Ben Gadd:

Continue reading

Elizabeth May Falls from Grace

Thank you Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada, for revealing to us who your real masters are. You always said you would “speak truth to power, no matter how unpopular or politically incorrect”. I believed you. But you have fallen from grace. Certain topics cause you to abandon logic and reason, and you exhibit a Pavlovian response.

What follows are portions of an email exchange which was cc’ed and bcc’ed to a number of people. It began with my brief agreement with Fay Ash who encouraged Elizabeth May and the Green Party to revisit climate policies such as the carbon tax, and to take a close look at media censorship and whose interests were being served with what agenda.

On Dec 30, 2016, at 10:01 PM, Elizabeth May  wrote:

Denial of Holocaust and denial of climate change science are manifestly unacceptable — deeply abhorrent. Facts, history and reality are against your views. Time is of the essence. You stand against science, our obligations to history and to future generations.


Continue reading