Free Speech Monitor: July/August, 2006
Killer Gets Sweetheart Deal in Killing of Droege

On Friday, June 15 Keith de Roux a Toronto drug addict pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the murder of Heritage Front founder Wolfgang Droege, on April 13, 2005. He received a 10 year sentence, on top of the 14 months already spent in prison. He may well be out in another three years and four months on mandatory supervision – a pretty skimpy penalty for murder.

The National Post (June 17, 2006) article  is loaded with distortions, smears and speculation. Now beyond the reach of libel suits, the Asper’s mouthpiece labels Mr. Droege a “cocaine dealer.” Mr. Droege was never convicted of any drug offences in Canada and never was a skinhead. “Droege's friend Keith Deroux pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the 55-year-old's death on April 13, 2005, drawing a 10-year sentence. At first, police thought the killing was sparked by a dispute over a woman. But an agreed statement of facts read in court Friday said the 44-year-old Deroux's cocaine addiction was fuelling ‘paranoid delusions’ that listening devices and cameras had been placed in his apartment. The drug addict believed someone was sending him coded messages through his computer and, even after moving to a new residence, Deroux feared people were entering his house through an underground tunnel and funnelling "noxious gases" into the residence. The only person with enough resources for this kind of surveillance, Deroux figured, was his friend and cocaine dealer, Wolfgang Droege. … Deroux mailed a gun to his aunt's house back in Toronto and set up a meeting with Droege on the pretext of buying drugs. In the days before the shooting, Deroux drank, snorted cocaine and ingested "large quantities" of Tylenol 3 -- while withdrawing from methadone, which he'd been taking for a heroin addiction, court heard.” Toronto's media and  political establishment could scarcely disguise their delight last April at Mr. Droege’s murder. Thus, it's little wonder that the case has not been exactly vigorously prosecuted. A man obtains a handgun illegally, loads it and carries it to Mr. Droege’s apartment, confronts and ambushes him and shoots him four times. This certainly looks like premeditated murder, not accidental manslaughter. However, delusional or drug addled de Roux was he certainly made careful plans in the execution of his plan to kill Mr. Droege.  Questions:

1. Canada's political establishment justifies gun confiscation and this country's restrictive gun laws as well as “hate” laws on the basis of the need to prevent violence. Well, de Roux had violated many gun laws – illegal possession of a restricted weapon, illegal carrying of a restricted weapon, unsafe transport (mailing?) of a restricted weapon, use of a restricted weapon in the commission of a crime. Why, if the use of firearms to perpetrate violence is such a concer,n was de Roux not nailed with a host of gun charges?

2. Was de Roux, a highly unstable over-wrought individual, influenced or put up to his actions by another person who was jealous of Mr. Droege's success and fame?

 3. Was de Roux influenced by the same  individual who had jealousy issues over the same woman de Roux had been involved with and who was a friend of Droege?

 4. This same individual or an associate  called the real estate company that had listed de Roux's house and said it was a crack den, causing the company to lift the listing. This tormenting of de Roux was portrayed to drug dealer and druggie de Roux as Mr. Droege’s work.

 5. Some individuals who had access to Wolf's apartment after his death also had access to de Roux's.

6. Initial reports had de Roux driven to Mr. Droege’s apartment by a relative. Why wasn't he charged.?

Letter from Political Prisoner David Irving

"First, I apologize for using this paper.  A coffee disaster this morning has effectively polluted most of my remaining paper but you're “family” so I can use it on you without (many) qualms.  Next, thank you (to the power of ten) for the attached photographs.  I liked the T-shirt, and greatly appreciated the logo, “Austria Sucks!”  I expect to see you when I am released, and we have now served our appeal. So, I hope it will be in the winter, and after 2-3 months repairing fences in London,  I shall embark on a U.S. lecture tour.  You could of course come and help me on all or part of the tour.  First, I have to renew my visa;  it expired in November, shortly after my freedom.  I expect the visa renewal will take some time, for reasons you can divine. This imprisonment has made a huge hole in our finances, un-refundable airline tickets, lecture fees at universities, etc. … Around $300,00 I would expect to be the hole I have to refill.  Hence, a new lecture tour!  Problem is, I can't write and drive.  Himmler is going well, I don't have many idle hours in the week.  I have about one visitor a month. A month ago a nice visit from one daughter, from Madrid. Keep an eye on my website.  I cannot access the Internet; so I have no idea what's on it about the imprisonment.  Gotta go now.  Well, not exactly “go”; have a hundred letters to write.  Well, not exactly a hundred, but a LOT."  -- David 

Crown Wants Longer Sentence for Free Speech than Rapists & Gunmen

Only the propaganda media mouthpieces in an increasingly Soviet and repressive state would babble: “Londoner faces new complaint by rights watchdog.” (London Free Press, July 4, 2006) However, that's the headline to an article written by Randy Richmond, pal of professional human rights complaints filer (20 and climbing) Richard Warman of Ottawa. If the Canadian Human Rights Commission is a “rights watchdog”, the KGB were humanitarians. The Canadian Human Rights Commission ruthlessly seeks to suppress right of centre dissent on the Internet. The Canadian Human Rights Commission, using a lengthy affidavit from Internet snoop Warman, has filed contempt of court charges against Tomasz Winnicki of London. A federal court order sought to gag Mr. Winnicki last summer even before his case was heard by a human rights tribunal. He was accused of having posted comments “likely to expose to hatred or contempt” some of Canada's privileged minority groups. Winnicki, a Polish immigrant, frequently expresses amazement at the repression of free speech in supposedly “free” Canada and sees the state suppression of thought as similar to the communist state he left as a boy. The London wood craftsman exhibits a solid stubbornness that refuses to be silenced. He has continued to post material on sites such as VNN in the U.S. He explained to CAFÉ recently most emphatically: “I’m not writing hate. I’m just expressing my opinions. I don't intend to spread hate against anybody.”

 “Tomasz Winnicki … already faces six months to a year in jail or a $6,000 fine for Internet messages posted last fall and winter,” the Richmond article reported. We've learned, in fact, that the Crown may be seeking a five year sentence for contempt.

 “His hearing was postponed until July 4,” says Melissa Guille, head of the Canadian Heritage Alliance. “He has a lawyer and they are in Ottawa today for the hearing. Looks like 6 months have increased - they are asking that Winnicki gets up to 5 years in jail! That is outrageous! Pedophiles, violent criminals, and thieves get that kind of sentencing. Winnicki used written the word and is being treated like the lowest of criminals. I can't believe it.” Miss Guille is, of course, absolutely correct. Canada's politically correct judicial system deals far more harshly with dissidents that it does with gunmen. Andre Thompson, since charged with attempted manslaughter in the Jane Glenn Creba Boxing Day shooting spree between Negro gangs in downtown Toronto, had just gotten out of prison, having been sentenced to a month for his role in an armed robbery of a convenience store. He was in the Maplehurst Provincial Detention Centre during the same time political prisoner Brad Love was serving almost 100 days for writing letters critical of Negro violent crime to his local newspaper The Etobicoke Guardian. Thompson was a gunman and got a month's sentence; Love was a dissident writer and got 100 days!

Warman and Leo Adler of the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre are howling for the London City Police to lay Sec. 319 Criminal Code “hate” charges against Mr. Winnicki. “Warman also wondered aloud what it will take for London police to take action against Winnicki. ‘The first people I complained to (three years ago) were the London police.  To date, there has been response from the Canadian Human Rights Commission tribunal and the federal court, but there has been nothing to date from the London police.’ His concern was echoed by the human rights organization Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre, which issued a release calling for London police to charge Winnicki with wilfully promoting hatred. For three years, representatives of Jewish, Arabic, black, South Asian and human rights groups have pressed police to lay charges, said Leo Adler, director of national affairs for the centre. Some minority groups seem especially keen on gagging dissenting Canadians.  Adler and Warman are thick. In the summer of 2003, they both travelled to Paris to a UN-sponsored conference on hate co-sponsored by the Wiesenthal Centre. Warman was also with his parents. We’ve asked many times since who paid for Warman’s travel. He's been pretty closed mouthed about his funding.

Censorship Fails at the Border

Well, minorities are at it again. An unlikely coalition of Jewish lobbyists, Hindus, homosexuals and some Moslems have managed to convince Tory Immigration Minister Monte Solberg to deny admission to Canada to a Moslem imam from Britain. Now, if he were here to preach violence or jihad, we’d have no problem keeping him out. On the other hand, over the years our shores have been graced by people like Ariel Sharon, Menachem Begin and Benjamin Netanyahu, all of whom have much blood on their hands. If he'd instigated the butchery of hundreds of refugees as did ex-Israeli Prime Minister Sharon, no problem. The rap against the imam is that he has some strong views critical of Jews, Hindus and homosexuals. Oh, well, that's a different matter. Somebody's finely tuned sensitivities might be hurt. Keep him out!

“Sheikh Riyadh ul-Haq, a prominent cleric in England who has been accused of publicly vilifying Jews and Hindus, among other groups, was slated to be the keynote speaker for the weekend Youth Tarbiyah conference, sponsored by the Islamic Foundation of Toronto.  Sources told CTV News that Immigration Minister Monte Solberg informed immigration officials that ul Haq should not be allowed into the country because of his extreme views. The cleric has been accused of making inflammatory comments about Jews, Hindus and moderate Muslims, as well as gay, bisexual and transsexual people. Ul Haq was recently called into the Canadian High Commission in London and was told he would not be admissible to Canada on grounds that his views could incite hatred and violence.  ‘The government has taken the decision that he is not a Canadian citizen, and why are we going to let somebody like that into the country to propagate these kind of views?’ CTV's Ottawa bureau chief Robert Fife told Newsnet. "And the government is confident that most people will support them on that view." News of the imam's planned visit has enraged Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and gay-rights groups, who wrote last week to Solberg calling for Canada to refuse ul Haq entry to Canada under anti-hatred laws. In a letter, the Muslim Canadian Congress, Canadian Jewish Congress, Hindu Dharma Mission and Egale Canada, a gay-rights group, said ul Haq's history of ‘dangerous and inflammatory’ statements are an affront to Canadian values. The Canadian Jewish Congress issued a statement on Thursday commending Solberg's decision. ‘We applaud Immigration Minister Monte Solberg's leadership when he made it clear that minority communities in Canada will not face unnecessary and hateful vilification,’ said CJC National President Ed Morgan.” (CTV News, June 29, 2006) `The Canadian Coalition for Democracies supported banning the imam and quoted some of his remarks:

On Moderate Muslims:  "The only Muslims who are considered moderates are those who for example, forgive me for polluting the masjid's [mosque's] atmosphere by saying this, but those Muslims who openly advocate lesbianism, those who are publicly declared homosexuals, Muslims who don't believe in segregation - the hijab - who feel no shame bowing down and kissing the Pope's hand, those Muslims who feel absolutely no shame, or they don't see any sense of irony in the fact that they openly declare that Israel should be recognized as a Jewish state, not only should Jerusalem be handed over completely to the Jews, but even the Masjid al-Aqsa."

On Hindus and Jews: "Of the peoples of the earth, the ones that hate Muslims the most, the ones who are bitterest in their enmity towards Muslims, the most unrelenting, unforgiving, are the Jews and the mushrikin [Hindus], idolaters in all their forms."

Harsh, perhaps, but no call for violence. The groups baying for censorship, of course, proclaimed their commitment to free speech. “While we're not in favour of policing the speech of Canadians, we don't think Canada should be a platform for foreign inciters to come and upset our tolerance. There is no room for this kind of speech in Canada,” said Ed Morgan, national president of the Canadian Jewish Congress, presumably with his tongue firmly in his cheek. From “hate laws” to Internet censorship, few groups are more in favour “of policing the speech of Canadians” than the CJC.  There must have been guffaws when Morgan delivered these absurdities. Not to be outdone was the spokesman for EGALE – Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere – a militant homosexual lobby group. “Gilles Marchildon, executive director of EGALE Canada, said it is significant these four  groups, which are often at odds [but not about censorship] have formed a united front over this issue. ‘We don't always agree. But we share a common concern in this case about the incitement of hate. We don't want to censor anyone but  we don't want this in our backyard.” (National Post, June 29, 2006) Of course, he wants to censor. However, the last laugh was on the censors. The organizers of the Youth Tarbiya Conference piped in a speech by the imam by closed circuit television. The Internet is making thought control and  censorship more and more difficult