Talk:Paul Fromm (white supremacist)

message: Opening Sentence:
There were three references for the "ties to Ku Klux Klan" assertion in the opening sentence, and all were flawed. The first reference was to a KKK site that doesn't work, and because Thomas Robb sponsors an event that someone speaks at doesn't mean that the speaker is tied to the KKK. If you are asked to speak somewhere, are you tied with everyone connected to the event and the organizations that they are involved in? No, and such an assertion is a stretch at best. The second reference was to a Toronto Sun article which reported on the ARA protesting at Fromm's house not about Fromm having ties to the KKK. The third reference was to an antisemitism site that alleges that Fromm has prominence in the "neo-Nazi speaking circuit," but does not mention the KKK.
It can be established, however, that Fromm has ties to David Duke and Don Black (both former KKK members) through Stormfront, and thus I changed the sentence to that which can be verified.
Public Opposition:
A paragraph in the public opposition section, about the protest at Fromm's house, did not accurately reflect the way the event was reported in the article that it uses as a reference. If you don't believe me, contact the Toronto Sun and ask them for a copy from the archives.
In the opposition to Tamils section, a cherry picked quote saying, "...so terrified the receptionist that she locked the door...." was used to put the protest in the worst possible light. It does not mention that they acted peacefully and lawfully and that it ended without incident. On the other hand, the paragraph in the public opposition to Fromm section leaves out the fact that the police had to follow the ARA (it didn't even indentify them) from the start in riot gear, removed them from private property, nor that Richard Warman encouraged it, and the paragraph ends by saying that there was no incident to put that protest in the best possible light. One can only conclude that an attempt is being made to slant information that is presented and that's not an appropriate use of Wikipedia.
Therefore, I replaced the paragraph with accurate and complete information from the Toronto Sun article that was referenced and another source. 206.217.211.108 (talk) 09:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy

message: A book published by an academic in 1987 (Is God A Racist? by Stanley R. Barrett) revealed that Paul Fromm is a federal police agent, he set up his Edmund Burke Society as a national police front for multiple federal police agencies reporting to the Prime Minister and the Justice Minister.
It is therefore quite frankly irrational to call Fromm anything but a police stooge, an agent provocateur. What should be done is to investigate how this happened, what the consequences have been, and how Fromm has assisted the federal police since he was recruited in 1967, up to the present day.  This would bring about a profile of who Fromm really is, what he has been up to, and why he has been up to it.
A summary of the situation is here, and there's a link to download a scan of the relevant book pages.  https://nosnowinmoscow.net/2019/10/26/paul-fromms-edmund-burke-society-was-a-national-police-operation-under-soviet-agent-pearson-and-pierre-elliott-trudeau-part-i/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.46.180.85 (talk) 23:59, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy 

message: Deletions of whole paragraphs must be explained. Ground Zero 18:08, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Para del?

message: This paragraph should be deleted.
"In 1991, Fromm was instrumental in helping former Toronto Sun education writer Judi McLeod - also a member of Fromm's organization C-FAR "Citizens for Foreign Aid Reform" - start the right-wing newspaper "Our Toronto" now known as "The Toronto Free Press" and "Canada Free Press". Fromm and McLeod were close through mutual friend Richard James who in turn was a close personal friend of Ernst Zundel."
This is a maliciously made falsity and should be removed.  Judi McLeod is anti-racist, has written articles criticising Ernst Zundel, of whom she and Canada Free Press would seem to have a very low opinion thereof.  She never even had any contact with Paul Fromm, as far as I know.  Nor was she ever a member of C-FAR, which is a neo-nazi front. Hobbes000 21:11, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  McLeod's newspaper has published racist articles including this gem  "The admission of Turkey into the European Community will be the final blow to the Christian identity of Europe. Once the Turkish people are free to live in and work, legally, in the European nation of their choice, the problem will not be Paris burning but a deluge of Islamic immigrants into the Christian world which will be unstoppable. If one remembers with horror the acts of Black September, the Red Brigade, or the sectarian violence in Yugoslavia; then, just wait until every citizen of Turkey has a European Passport." You claim McLeod has written articles denouncing Ernst Zundel, Paul Fromm, etc but these articles are nowhere to be found. Links, please. Or were you hoping you could bluff us? That's a typical Judi McLeod tactic. In fact Judi McLeod refuses to write anything against Paul Fromm and published a short letter to the editor from him. --Cyberboomer 00:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The author of the paragraph has been asked for a citation, and the request is in the article itself.  I'm sure he'll be by to explain himself soon enough. Jayjg (talk) 21:52, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In 1991, Fromm was instrumental in helping former Toronto Sun education writer Judi McLeod - also a member of Fromm's organization C-FAR "Citizens for Foreign Aid Reform" - start the right-wing newspaper "Our Toronto" now known as "The Toronto Free Press" and "Canada Free Press". Fromm and McLeod were close through mutual friend Richard James who in turn was a close personal friend of Ernst Zundel.(needs verification) 
I've put it in as a "hidden comment" (which means readers can't see it but also means it doesn't get lost) and will go through the history and see if I can find who added it. Homey 15:45, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm too young to remember apartheid, but my dad told me that a lot of the opposition to the anti-apartheid movement in the 1980s was due to the movement's association with communists and socialists, rather than actual support for apartheid 
Yes, the same excuses were used in the 1930s by those who favoured appeasing Hiter- he was such a good anti-Communist after all.
Anyway, does McLeod deny having ever been a member of C-FAR?Homey 01:50, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistencies 

message: I accidently added this into the wrong section, so I'm reposting it here.
Isn't "neo-nazi" an incorrect nomenclature to define Fromm?
Doesn't that breach the neutrality of the article, and border on libelous? I've noticed other wiki biographies of racists or "racialists", have a more fair and balanced approach. For example, David Duke's wiki page lists what his self styled title is (white nationalist), and what opposition or critics label him(white supremacist). Paul Fromm's article has neither side, it merely states an incorrect title / nomenclature as matter of fact, even though Fromm himself, and mainstream media have never labeled Fromm a Neo-Nazi, they've just stated he has ties with them. 
The neutrality also seems to be compromised with the term "leader".  If he is a neo-nazi leader, then there should be sources of people describing him as a leader who promotes the resurgence of a German Third Reich type government. 
It is a fact he has represented white nationalists and neo-nazi type people, but acting as an interested party for alleged neo-nazis in tribunal hearings do not necessarily mean he is neo-nazi himself. Non-White Lawyers for the ACLU have represented the KKK in court, it doesn't mean they agree with the entire position of the KKK, all it means is they believe the party they represent deserve legal counsel as a right, and that preserving freedom of speech is important.
The "Neo-Nazi" label also has "fascist" or even violent overtones.  Reading the sources on the biography show that Fromm's actions have not shown a provlicity for violence or a resurgence of fasicm. "Fascists" are usually against free speech, advocate restriction of rights of citizens, and are against the proliferation of mediums such as the internet. Paul Fromm's actions have not shown fascist tendencies, but quite the opposite, his organistions clearly have acted with preserving civil rights such as free expression, he is his self described "civil libertarian" (albeit with racial undertones),  and therefore "civil libertarian" should be a title / nomenclature at least mentioned in the biography. Kleinback 10:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see there was a Stormfront posting about this just today.  I also see an article from last week in the Globe and Mail titled, "Ex-teacher loses licence over neo-Nazi ties" while the Toronto Sun says he's been "described as a "senior player" in the neo-Nazi movement in Canada". I don't think that calling him a "civil libertarian" would be objective or neutral.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 17:27, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: There is nothing to debate here. Fromm is openly praises the Nationalist-Socialist Party of Canada, and has provided legal support for its leader. He is also heavily connected with various Klan factions in the U.S. For the plethora of examples, these being just two, his politics fit the category of "neo"-Nazi perfectly. Frank Pais (talk) 15:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't "Neo-Nazi" an incorrect title. 

message: Can you please explain yourself why you keep reverting Fromm's wiki by stating he's a neo-nazi leader?  
I see you always try to write the most uplifting thing to say about people involved in Communist groups, but try to use words such as "neo-nazi leader" for people like Fromm, who has a history of being very anti-communist.  Are all anti-communists neo-nazis to you?
Fromm doesn't call himself  a neo-nazi, and he has never been a member of a neo-nazi group according to my research.  Wikipedia biographies are supposed to be neutral remember, so please tell me what neo nazi group/party Fromm is the leader of.  Are there neo-nazi conventions where they vote for a leader like they do for the communist party of Canada, or the Conservative party of Canada?
Is he a member or leader of the Nationalist-Socialist Party of Canada?  Was he a member of the American Neo-nazi party or the Canadian neo-nazi party?
Example: If you're going to state matter of a fact somebody is a "democrat", wouldn't that person have to be a member of a the democratic party, or at least have stated they are a democrat on record?  Would you write a wiki article about Hillary Clinton stating she's a republican leader?
Kleinback (talk) 20:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing to debate here.  Fromm is openly praises the Nationalist-Socialist Party of Canada, and has provided legal support for its leader.  He is also heavily connected with various Klan factions in the U.S.  For the plethora of examples, these being just two, his politics fit the category of "neo"-Nazi perfectly. Frank Pais (talk) 15:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supervideogamekid 

message: Since when is obvious vandalism and POV edits considered to be grounds for legitimate disputes?  In any case, where is the discussion happening with regard to how the entry should read?  If there is a dispute I would have thought that a link to the discussion would have been provided. Frank Pais (talk) 22:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And calling Richard Warman an anti-free speech whiner is neutral? Bearcat (talk) 01:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

text: David Fromm?  Who is that?  I think you need to check the article you're commenting on.  And POV?  This has nothing to do with POV, except on the part of people who are ironically attempting to paint an admitted white supremacist and neo-Nazi organizer as a champion of democratic values.  Neutral situations demand neutral language - Fromm is the farthest thing from neutral.  Watering down unflattering facts is completely counter to maintaining a NPOV.  Frank Pais (talk) 17:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputes? 

message: I think it should be noted that all of the protests that this man has been a part of are extremely small. I saw the one in Victoria against the Tamils... it had about 5 people. I mean these are extemely sick people, some of them are under medical treatment. It's important that these ramblings of mostly pretty sick people are not interpreted strictly in political terms.Canadaman1 (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size of Protests 

message: An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:11, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Paul Fromm (white supremacist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101029195531/http://www2.mississauga.ca/vote2010/results_mayor_2010.asp to http://www2.mississauga.ca/vote2010/results_mayor_2010.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080509090738/http://www.aratoronto.com/18jan07.html to http://www.aratoronto.com/18jan07.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071129232408/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=d6a84a0b-b5af-4f45-a492-7d29dfe30345 to http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=d6a84a0b-b5af-4f45-a492-7d29dfe30345
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I created :File:Aryan Guard with Paul Fromm 2009-03-22 (cropped).jpg and placed in the article body, outside of the infobox.  But, another user added to the infobox, leaving it in two places.  I feel it belongs in the body only.  Whenever possible, we should have an image of just one person for a bio infobox.  In this case, cropping to just get a single person would produce a very low-quality low-resolution photo.  Also, this obviously isn't a posed image, and it doesn't have subject looking anywhere near the camera.  Fromm isn't even closest to the camera, but noticeably further than two other people.  Somebody with no idea what Fromm looks like, could think the guy with a camcorder is the subject.  A bio infobox photo, should have the subject of the article be the primary, or at-least co-equal, subject of the photo.  This is an event photo.  It belongs in near the text that mentions the event (with a citation), along with a full caption, making clear which person he is.  --Rob (talk) 23:59, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image placed in Infobox 

message: To explain my edit.  Fromm is a White supremacist.  The lead should reflect the body of the article, which says this.   Also, we should not use Fromm's self-description on Twitter.   Unless somebody's tweets are published in a reliable source, they shouldn't be mentioned in Wikipedia.  --Rob (talk) 06:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  supremacist and twitter self-identification 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:24, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: the page stated that he used to admire Castro, But in a recent interview he did, He denies it (skip to 18:49). should we discuss this? MrMemer33 (talk) 01:47, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Part about Castro