First, the serious part. Warman vs. Lemire is due out on Wednesday morning and should be on the CHRT website at 9:30 am eastern standard time.

Now, onto Paulie

As some of our reader know, today was the last day for submissions to the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism. The mandate and vision of the coalition can be found on their website, however it can be summed up as an effort to examine and combat the increasing tide of antisemitic propaganda worldwide and in Canada.

Not surprisingly, Paul Fromm and his one-man (mostly) movement doesn't think that antisemitism is really that big a deal so "they" submitted their own recommendation, the first part of which is found below:

Canadian Association for Free Expression Inc.
P.O. Box 332,
Rexdale, ON.,
M9W 5L3
PH: 905-274-3868; FAX: 905-278-2413

Submission to The Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism
440-C Centre Block,
House of Commons,
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0A6
Phone: 613-947-2277 Fax: 613-947-2278
Email: info@cpcca.ca\

[This is an executive summary of our position. We have not included footnotes and documentation, which would be included in a more formal submission. This is the thrust of the remarks we would present should we be called to appear at the hearings the Coalition proposes to hold later this year.]

Disband

There are many problems confronting Canadians today. “Anti-Semitism” isn’t one of them. The raison d’etre of the Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism reads, in part: “The extent and severity of antisemitism is widely regarded as at its worst level since the end of the Second World War.”

This is factually false, fearmongering and absolutely ludicrous.

Paulie goes on to reprint the same, tired old antisemitic propaganda concerning Jewish control of the media, culture, etc so we won't bore our dear readers with it since you've all seen and heard it before. He then writes:

As there is virtually no crisis of anti-Semitism, we urge that this Coalition disband as there is no useful work for them to do.

Inter Group Conflict

Having said that Canadians are extremely tolerant and accepting of minorities, especially Jews, there are nonetheless some points of inter group tension in Canada.

1, First, is the correct perception that organized Jewish groups like the Canadian Jewish Congress, the League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith and the Friends of the Simon Weisenthal Centre actively lobby to restrict free speech in Canada. [It must be noted that many individual Jews, like Ezra Levant and journalist George Jonas are outspoken opponents of such censorship.]

Going back to the 1930s, the Canadian Jewish Congress persistently lobbied for restrictions on free speech, which eventually saw the light of day in Canadian law as Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code, the so-called "hate law." Groups like the Canadian Jewish Congress, the League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith and the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, remain outspoken defenders of the widely discredited Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Internet censorship provisions where truth is no defence, intent is no defence and the threshold is so low that merely criticizing privileged minorities can get the poster into trouble. All three groups intervened in favour of censorship in Ricihard Warman v Marc Lemire, a case wherein Mr. Lemire launched a constitutional challenge against Sec. 13.

Currently, the League for Human Rights of B'nai Brith and their Victoria operative Harry Abrams have launched a Canadian Human Rights Commission Sec. 13 complaint against Quesnel, BC journalist Arthur Topham and his radicalpress.com. This complaint seeks to make criticism of Israeli policies a discriminatory offence.

Recommendation: It's unhealthy for a group, especially a minority, to be seen trying to take away rights from other people. Organized Jewish groups should adopt a more libertarian approach to free speech and not be seen to be trying to silence critics.

2. Second, perhaps the major factor in intergroup conflict involving Jews is the pernicious and ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

There are really two irreconcilable positions. One, is the Zionist position, apparently endorsed by this Coalition. This position holds that large numbers of Jewish foreigners, some claiming a distant ancestral attachment to Palestine, were justified in the 20th century to occupy the land of others; namely, Palestinians, Christian and Moslem. The land of many of these people was seized and they were expelled, many to live for decades in wretched refugee camps. When some of these Palestinians armed and used guerilla warfare tactics (as the Zionists had used in the 1940s) to regain their homeland, they were denounced as terrorists. It is hard to explain to Palestinians why they should have to sacrifice their homeland to outsiders and be second class citizens, if citizens at all, in the land of their birth,.

In the Zionist view, Jews have a right to their homeland in Palestine, Palestinians should meekly accept their dispossession, and neighbouring Arab nations should live in peace with the State of Israel.

There are, of course, many shades of Zionist and anti-Zionist opinion. The Middle East is a snakepit or irreconcilable differences that would test the wisdom of Solomon.

Recommendation: The Coalition cites tensions among Zionist Jews and anti-Zionists, especially on university campuses in Canada. Here, we urge a Canada First approach. The Middle East is not Canada's problem. Both factions, the Zionists and the anti-Zionists, should be encouraged to leave their quarrels in the old country. They are in Canada now and should be loyal to Canada.

Politicians, especially, should not pander to either faction, but should pursue a strict Canada First policy of neutrality: trade with all; aid to none.

Finally, we urge the Coalition to disband as the "problem" it seeks to solve is wildly overblown and the formation of such a Coalition, with much media fanfare, is provocative and offensive. -- Paul Fromm, Director

In other words, there is not antisemitism, but if there is antisemitism, the Jews are at fault.

We here at the ARC Collective especially enjoyed how Paulie believes that his.... er.... we mean CAFE's, submission to the coalition is actually going to be taken seriously as an interested party and not ignored like the wingnut he,... er.... they are. Paulie even made a grand announcement on his Facebook profile:

[Image]Right. We're sure that the coalition members have all read your submission and have now been shamed into agreeing with your position Paulie. You and your terrible spelling (you did teach English, didn't you?) have cause them all to acquiesce in the face of the strength of your argument.

Of course, given that this was found a little further down on your Facebook profile, well, we think that it might be hard to take you seriously:

[Image]
Hey, we had to see this so we think it's only fair that we subject our dear readers to the same pain that we felt. Might we also remind you how Paulie looks without his shirt?

[Image]Rawr!

And, if the idea of Paul Fromm pounding some woman from behind isn't foul enough, we know what his wife looks like.

We will not make our dear readers suffer any more by posting her pictures.

Maybe Paul, just maybe, you should act your age.