Then, in the fall of 1958, something truly amazing happened. The monkeys on Koshima Island where this was all occurring reached a threshold in numbers one day and (using the figure of 99 monkeys) suddenly the 100th monkey also learned the new trick and by that same evening almost all the monkeys in the tribe were washing their sweet potatoes off.
As Ken Keyes, Jr. wrote, “The added energy of this hundredth monkey somehow created an ideological breakthrough!” But, as he goes on to further explain, that wasn’t all. Spontaneously the habit of washing sweet potatoes “jumped over the sea” and “colonies of monkeys on other islands and the mainland troop of monkeys on Takasakiyama began washing their sweet potatoes!”
Based on these events Keyes, Jr. concluded, “Thus, when a certain critical number achieves an awareness, this new awareness may be communicated from mind to mind. Although the exact number may vary, the Hundredth Monkey Phenomenon means that when only a limited number of people know of a new way, it may remain the consciousness property of these people. But there is a point at which if only one more person tunes-in to a new awareness, a field is strengthened so that this awareness reaches almost everyone!”
This story, as both fact and metaphor, aptly and succinctly describes what has been happening to the Internet over its past thirty year evolvment. In this regard one might also reflect on the words of a speech “The Internet vs. the State” given by Eric Garris, an activist in the USA, to a group of Libertarians back in 2005 where he said:
“At the 1977 Libertarian Party Convention, mind-expansion advocate and LSD guru Timothy Leary gave a speech that few of us took very seriously. He spoke of something called the Internet, a network that would connect computers worldwide, allowing participants from around the globe to sign on and retrieve text, photographs, audio and video instantaneously, and to communicate in real time with anyone in the whole world who also had a computer and a connection. He said that it would be the new revolution against the current social order and stifling status quo. He predicted it would be much, much bigger than drugs in its ability to overthrow the establishment. Whereas tuning in, turning on and dropping out had been of great interest to a somewhat narrow subset of the population, everyone would be able to use the Internet, in his own way, and thus the new revolution against the old order would transcend class, age, nationality and all other demographics. The bourgeois would have just as much interest and use for it as the so-called counterculture. And nothing would ever again be the same.
As I said, no one at the time really believed it. We figured Leary had just done a little too much acid and his imagination had gotten the best of him. The network of information he described seemed totally impossible – and yet it exists, precisely as he predicted it, right now.”
There is no longer any doubt in 2008 that Timothy Leary was, in this sense, a prophet in his time. The number of Internet users is so vast and the information so quantitatively and qualitatively expansive that it has become the most stupendous, liberating, truly democratic and open communications system our world has ever known.
But, these positive aspects of the Internet do not bode well for everyone or for every institution that existed prior to its advent. The old, centralized state mentality, along with its controlled and complicit media system and its influence, are now being left behind in the digital dust so to speak as Internet users turn more and more to the Net and to alternate news sources and blogs to find a much greater and broader expanse of opinion and analysis when it comes to the presentation and understanding of current events and their underlying root causes.
This new situation thus creates for those old-paradigm groups not only a challenge in terms of their diminishing effectiveness in maintaining their agendas but also a major public relations problem in terms of their ability to continue to portray their reality and history in the same light that they were accustomed to in the past. Hidden knowledge about the skeletons within their closets is now being revealed en masse to millions of Internet users and this power of persuasion which they once held firmly within their grasp has now been virtually torn from their hands and the flaming torch of freedom of thought has been let loose and is lighting millions of other torch/minds around the globe. It is a threat that the old order is being forced to respond to as it faces losing its pseudo-credibility and the prospect of sinking into the Cyberian sunset never to arise again with the power it once wielded over public opinion.
I have stated on numerous occasions over the years that the Internet is the Achilles Heel for those who cling to maintaining the old political/financial/social order; one that has brutalized and terrorized and held humanity in bondage for centuries. Nowhere are Canadians now seeing this looming struggle between the forces of the old and the new than in the present attempts by the Zionist-controlled League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress to silence critics of both the state of Israel and Israel’s propaganda arms in this country of which they are the two main proponents. To these organizations the Internet is a clear and present danger to their past power and glory and they do not want that power and glory challenged and will use any means at their disposal to kill that Hundredth Monkey and keep the “new awareness” from reaching the people. Whether this means subverting Canada’s judicial system and perverting its processes for their own purposes and doing all in their power to put into jail cells anyone who would resist their fascist, totalitarian designs, these false front organizations are out to fight tooth and nail to protect their traditional racket and its territory.
The following lengthy “Response” to the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and to the charges which Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada have brought against both myself and my website form the opening chapter in my personal encounter with these groups that I now wish to share with the cyber public. It is basically my analysis of how I perceive this looming battle, its various strategies and why it is now occurring. I hope that others can learn from my experiences and join with the numbers of growing individuals and groups and organizations from across the Canadian Internet community who are waking up to this imminent and challenging danger to our basic human right to open access to information.
On November 20th, 2007 I received an envelope via Canada Post addressed to me and my website http://www.radicalpress.com . The envelope had no return address on it nor was it registered. Upon opening it I learned that it contained a number of photocopied letters from the CHRC that had been sent to me earlier but had the wrong address on them and were returned. Also included in the envelope were copies of a “Complaint” sent to the Commission by Harry Abrams and the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada. Harry Abrams is the B.C. representative for said organization. The complaint was identical to one previously sent to another website owner in the spring of 2007, Al Rycroft of http://www.PEJ.org . The nature of the complaint thus worded contends that I and my website RadicalPress.com are contriving “…to promote ongoing hatred affecting persons identifiable as Jews and/or as citizens of Israel”.
As is the case in matters of this nature, when the CHRC consents to investigate such charges they ask the person or organization accused to reply to the charges. This reply is known as the “Response”. Below, please find my Response to these spurious charges.
———–
Much much more:
http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=628
Note: http://www.radicalpress...
http://www.PEJ.org
http://www.radicalpress...

<br />
<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/rex_murphy/human_rights_gone_awry.html">http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/rex_murphy/human_rights_gone_awry.html</a><br />
<br />
Now, think; "When they came for the 'radicals', I did nothing, because I was not a radical . . ."<p>---<br>The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1189">http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/1189</a><br />
<p>---<br>The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.<br />
"Non-Islamic pundits who comment on much of mainstream Islam’s lack of condemnation of acts like Bhutto’s assassination are quickly labeled “Islamophobes”."
"If they aren’t massacring tourists in Bali, then they’re bombing Spanish or British commuters and if they aren’t killing Westerners, then they’re killing each other as in Iraq, Afghanistan or Somalia. Anyone who still takes the proposition that Islam is the religion of peace seriously needs to give his or her head a shake."
"Radical Islam is today what National Socialism was in the 1930s." ...
Not even coherent, dude and not even on topic?
But I do promise to treat your links in the same manner as Dionysus ... Never Again
The whole idea of propaganda is that it is purposely manufactured in order to be irrational and incoherent and thus defy any credible analysis -- Propaganda doesn't really invite analysis, because it doesn't really make sense -- it is manufactured as a loyalty test for the 'true believers' to choke out rationality like so much kudzu and give a heads up to the elites as to whom they can trust.
Like Rex Murphy...and radical libertarians.
Incorrect. Coherent, and on topic.
One can critique actions of Muslims and not be brought to the HRC's, but critique Jews . . .and you end up where the author of the article is. In a dark room given the bare bulb treatment.
In my link above, Rex is stating exactally that. Critical thought should not be stifled. It is not out of hate that questions are asked. Not as you put it "He's a two-bit gatekeeper with an unfailing sense of class intellectual fatigue like most of his 'red dog' Conservatives pals that coyly appropriate 'left' critique when it's fashionable to do so.."
You seem like you don't want him to ask the questions. Where is the outrage at Ms. Bhutto's assassination?
---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.
and bear in mind those bleating about hate crimes see not hatecrime they visit on the Palistinians In legal terms they have "Dirty Hands"<br />
<br />
NEWS RELEASE: LEAGUE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS OF B ¹NAI BRITH CANADA alleges RadicalPress.com owner guilty of ³Hate Crimes² toward Jews and citizens of Israel.‏ <br />
From: The Radical Press (radical@radicalpress.com) <br />
Sent: January 7, 2008 3:35:32 PM <br />
To: RADICAL PRESS (radical@radicalpress.com) <br />
<br />
Dear Radical Reader,<br />
This news release went out to most major media outlets across B.C. and Canada this morning.<br />
<br />
Arthur Topham<br />
Pub/Ed<br />
The Radical Press<br />
Canada’s Radical News Network<br />
radical@radicalpress.com<br />
<a href="http://www.radicalpress.com">http://www.radicalpress.com</a><br />
“Digging to the root of the issues since 1998”<br />
------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
NEWS RELEASE <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE JANUARY 7, 2008 <br />
<br />
LEAGUE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS OF B’NAI BRITH CANADA alleges RadicalPress.com owner guilty of “Hate Crimes” toward Jews and citizens of Israel.<br />
<br />
QUESNEL, B.C. – Harry Abrams, B.C. representative for the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada has filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) alleging that Arthur Topham, Owner, Publisher & Editor of RadicalPress.com is promoting “hatred toward Jews and citizens of Israel” because of articles on his website that are critical of Zionism and the Jewish state of Israel. <br />
<br />
Topham, who has publishing both a hard copy newspaper and an online new site since 1998, said he received the complaint from the CHRC in an unmarked, unregistered envelope November 20, 2008. Contained within was an assortment of documents including a 3-page complaint from Abrams and B’nai Brith and a directive from the CHRC to respond to the Commission by an arranged date. <br />
<br />
In a hard-hitting, detailed, and thoroughly documented 13-page Response <a href="http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=629">http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=629</a> sent to CHRC “hate-team” investigator Sandy Kozak sandy.kozak@chrc-ccdp.ca on January 3, 2008 the RadicalPress.com publisher stated categorically, “Harry Abrams and his partner in this complaint, the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada are exploiting and abusing the intent of the Canadian Human Rights Act for their own narrow, partisan, ideological purposes” – ones which Topham strongly feels “are not designed to promote and ensure the freedom of expression that the vast majority of Canadians demand and expect but rather are meant to buttress and support the political aims of a foreign state (Israel) of which these organizations are but political extensions.” <br />
<br />
Topham further emphasized the fact that there has been a dramatic increase in these types of complaints to the CHRC by both the B’nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) since September 11, 2001 when the attack on the World Trade Center In New York city resulting in the loss of 3,000 lives. In the aftermath of that horrid event Canada brought in its new Anti-terrorism Act, c.41 on December 18th, 2001 and along with it came changes to Sec. 13 (1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act which specifically deals with “hate messages”. It is Topham’s contention that both the B’nai Brith and the CJC played a significant role in defining the new “Interpretation” of Sec. 13 (1) – one that now allows both of these partisan groups to lay “hate crimes” complaints against any Internet user or website owner who criticizes Israel’s Zionist ideology and its racist policies toward the Palestinian people. <br />
<br />
“It is nothing but a last ditch attempt by these Israeli front organizations to take control of the Internet in Canada and censor all dissenting opinions that don’t support Israel or its Zionist policies,” Topham said. “It is something the vast majority of Canadians are adamantly opposed to yet these groups are becoming bolder by the minute and are now even riding roughshod over Christian organizations, mainstream magazines like MacLeans and alternative media outlets such as the Radical Press. <br />
<br />
Topham feels that “It is definitely time a thorough and impartial investigation was carried out to determine the extent of their influence upon our judiciary and our institutions in general. No individual group should be manipulating Canada’s legal system for their own personal gain. Even CBC’s Rex Murphy is taking a strong stand against quasi-judicial bodies like the CHRC and seriously questioning their purpose and legitimacy as they become more and more susceptible to the type of manipulation and abuse that we’re now seeing spreading across the country.” <br />
<br />
Topham is firm in his intention to fight what he feels are spurious charges designed to silence debate on issues vital to both national and global peace. “If we cannot express our thoughts and ideas openly and freely,” he said, “then the democratic principles upon which Canada was founded become meaningless and dead and we might as well accept the fact that we are living in a communist dictatorship rather than a true democracy”. <br />
<br />
-30- <br />
<br />
<br />
CONTACT: Arthur Topham <br />
<br />
Email: radical@radicalpress.com <br />
<br />
Website: <a href="http://www.radicalpress.com">http://www.radicalpress.com</a><br />
<br />
Home: edited out home number as i fear for Athurs life<p>---<br>"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."<br />
<br />
William Blake<br />
<br />
Is that what your link was suppose to highlight -- were you making some point that if you write about Zionists and their influence on Canadian foreign policy, then Zionist organizations 'might' attack your website through manipulation and legal scams?
Sure...it's a given that racists like Frank Diament over at Banal Birth or Cotler's pals over at the CJC will raise money to undermine democracy in this country? So what...so will a dozen 'stakeholders' and special interests...just read about libel chill regarding edstelmach.ca / daveberta.blogspot.com ... apparently political consultants in AB don't DO their jobs and so they embarrass the client with a legal challenge
(and the most expensive way out if you notice -- why not call the guy up and give him a couple of hours of lawyers' time, buy the domain, get pictured, be blogged for 5 days and then! counterattack for a lot less and turn a loss into a 'old guy' web portal and run your own edstelmach.ca site as if it was your OWN personal echochamber?!!?
...(wait a mintue anyone can DO that??)
But looking like an idiot managing the 'world's last gold rush'! is much more Ed! Stelmach!'s style.
Just like the Zionists!, who tend to work for the same illusion like Ed Stelmach, who is too stupid for words and exactly the type of puppet foreigners need in AB...
A legal challenge is better than a well-defined democratically acceptable law....HEY even better if you can actually 'cite' a human emotion like 'hate' and make it sound very legal.
But Col. Rex Murphy isn't saying anything like that in YOUR LINK?
Sure...so how does that 'wrong' regarding Zionist pigs abusing regulatory law include YOU posting shit links that either
a)PROMOTE the same racism, or
b)post shit that suggests phantasms are everywhere and we should give DNA samples to the State or some other deranged shit that might make the old and withered in FortressNorthAm feel more 'safe'?
So your link was an example of 'hate'?
BTW I am actually FOR free speech and against any 'hate' law and that's why I consider Col. Rex to be the biggest phoney in the world, given that he spends more time questioning 'defs' of human rights, instead of protecting them...or the OTHER rabid racist traditions that people like Rex tend to follow in this cheery little colony....or old guy shit
Huh? What does that have to do with freedom of expression?
"Is that what your link was suppose to highlight -- were you making some point that if you write about Zionists and their influence on Canadian foreign policy, then Zionist organizations 'might' attack your website through manipulation and legal scams?"
Might? Do. Vive has been cited in the past for dissementating 'hate speech' by the CJC. Oddly enough, it was a story where a gang of Jews beat up a guy who regularly shows his anti-semetism. I don't share his views, but the story wasn't about his views, it was about his assault.
The CJC felt his NAME was anti-semetic.
"Sure...it's a given that racists like Frank Diament over at Banal Birth or Cotler's pals over at the CJC will raise money to undermine democracy in this country? So what...so will a dozen 'stakeholders' and special interests...just read about libel chill regarding edstelmach.ca / daveberta.blogspot.com ... apparently political consultants in AB don't DO their jobs and so they embarrass the client with a legal challenge"
This has nothing to do with hate speech. It is policy if someone registers a copyrighted, trade marked or personal domain. That domain can be 'taken' by the .CA registrar and re-assigned to a company or individual who it represents. Daveberta is clearly not Ed Stelmach.
"(and the most expensive way out if you notice -- why not call the guy up and give him a couple of hours of lawyers' time, buy the domain, get pictured, be blogged for 5 days and then! counterattack for a lot less and turn a loss into a 'old guy' web portal and run your own edstelmach.ca site as if it was your OWN personal echochamber?!!?"
How do we know he didn't try to get the domain back? Irrelevant to the discussion in any case.
"A legal challenge is better than a well-defined democratically acceptable law....HEY even better if you can actually 'cite' a human emotion like 'hate' and make it sound very legal."
Explain to me where the benefit is in Vive receiving a cease-and-desist order from the CJC on a story about a guy being asaulted. Then look up the term 'SLAPP lawsuit'.
"But Col. Rex Murphy isn't saying anything like that in YOUR LINK?
Sure...so how does that 'wrong' regarding Zionist pigs abusing regulatory law include YOU posting shit links that either
a)PROMOTE the same racism, or"
Show me where I promote racism. Especially since I haven't used the term 'Zionist Pigs'.
"b)post shit that suggests phantasms are everywhere and we should give DNA samples to the State or some other deranged shit that might make the old and withered in FortressNorthAm feel more 'safe'?"
Huh?
"So your link was an example of 'hate'? "
No. It was an example of free speech.
"BTW I am actually FOR free speech and against any 'hate' law and that's why I consider Col. Rex to be the biggest phoney in the world, given that he spends more time questioning 'defs' of human rights, instead of protecting them...or the OTHER rabid racist traditions that people like Rex tend to follow in this cheery little colony....or old guy shit"
. . .and yet, you rail against him when he exercises his right to free speech.
---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.
There are many within the Jewish faith culpable of crimes against humanity. For those who are culpable to raise their voices about racism and behave as they do smacks of hypocrisy!
---
"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."
William Blake
I certainly hope he can defend himself, and it's obvious that Author is intelligent, knowledgeable and definitely not a threat to anyone but the corrupt establishment that now stands against him.
The cards are stacked up against Author in every way imaginable. The CHRC is not a valid court, and there's no possibility of a defense, therefor all his accusers and jailers have to do is slam down the hammer and decree him to be guilty of whatever crime suits their purpose.
If the victim does not comply with their threatening demands and hefty extortion fees, an RCMP goon squad will show up at his door with fully charged up Tasers(TM), beating clubs, chains and shackles, not to mention loaded guns (that we are not allowed to have) - and a bloodthirsty eagerness to kill with legalized impunity.
How is Arthur going to defend himself? The only people who have tried, were either murdered outright on the spot, or have managed to kill off a few foaming RCMP in process, but were eventually doomed in the end.
Anyway, I certainly do wish Author well, and for all it's worth, he has my support.
he "shouted"
---
"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."
William Blake