Interested in what is going on day to day in Canada?  Join the Freedom-Site Mailing Lists, or view the Online Archives Updates Daily!





Save Free Speech Now!

A Description And Analysis Of The Movie "White Lies"

by Promajority

Aired in March of 1998 and August of 1999 on the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation).


-Sarah Polley as Catherine Chapman
(based upon former Heritage Front activist Elizabeth Moore)

-Tanya Allen as Erina
(based upon former Heritage Front activist Ellisse Hategan)

-Jonathan Scarfe as Ian (Chapman's boyfriend)
(a good looking Nordic-type and probably the boyfriend of Moore's dreams)

-Lynn Redgrave as Mrs. K
(the female version of Ernst Zundel)

Consultant: Elizabeth Moore upon whose experiences the film is based

The made-for-tv movie White Lies was aired on CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation which is a publicly funded network) in March of 1998 and in August of 1999. It claims to be based on "a fiction story" but is actually based upon the experiences of Elizabeth Moore who for a short period was an activist with the Toronto-based pro-White group the Heritage Front and who was also a "consultant" for this film. Moore's stint with the Front was followed by a defection to the camp of the anti-racists and it's her experiences on both sides of the racial/political divide that White Lies attempts to capture. Defection from the ranks of evil racists to that of the racial "good guys" was an opportunity which the progressive-minority coalition could simply not let pass. This opportunity was in fact so glorious that hollywood enlisted the services of heavyweights such as Sarah Polley, Tanya Allen, Jonathan Scarfe and even the venerable Lynn Redgrave.

The Heritage Front started in 1989 with an "equal rights for whites" platform and within a couple of years had managed to hit a nerve with parts of the public who were fed-up with the excesses of political correctness. It wasn't long, however, before the Front degenerated into a street-brawling skinhead cult; a path all too typical for such groups. However, during the several years of its existence there was a media frenzy of sorts surrounding the Front, and leader Wolfgang Droege and his group became a virtual household bogle.

In the summer of 1994 the media reported that one of the group's founding fathers, Grant Bristow, was a paid CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Service) informant. Bristow was notorious for provoking the Front to pair off with the violent anti-racist activists, and for hacking into answering machines, and to engaging in various semi-illegalities. The state was agitating the Front while the media were watching the Front with a microscope and reporting that "hate was on the rise" and that "neo-nazi groups were growing."

The Heritage Front offered the progressive-minority coalition both a delightful and desparately-needed propagandistic reference point around which they could rally their cause (religion?) of anti-racism. The coalition is inherently agitational and requires a constant flow of hysteria about the "dangers" of White racism and the "threat" of a "neo-nazi" resurgence. Until the rise of the Heritage Front they were forced to recycle hysteria about groups which were either defunct, inactive, or ridiculously small. Such groups included the Ku Klux Klan, The Western Guard, The Sir Edmund Burke Society, the Nationalist Party, and both small and short-lived cells of skinheads if and when they could be found. Hearing the same old lines about these golden oldies groups from the 1960's, 70's and 80's was actually becoming laughable. The Heritage Front provided them with long-awaited fresh material.

The Front played the Hollywood Nazi routine to perfection and gave the coalition all kinds of propagandistic arsenal. It gave their lobby for tougher hate (censorship) laws and anti-racism policies a shot in the arm, it also gave them cause to pontificate and moralize about White racism. It also provided them with the glorious opportunity to pounce on whatever political crossover might have existed between moderate supporters of the Front who supported their "equal rights for Whites" dimension and more respectable right wing groups and parties. The coalition, in its eternal quest to apply the "racist" label to as many people, groups and parties as it possibly can, sought to make links between the Heritage Front and virtually the entire right wing.

Such was the basis of Warren Kinsella's 1994 best-selling book Web of Hate. There was also Peter Raymont's 1995 documentary Hearts of Hate which it was stated in the credits was based upon Kinsella's book. Interestingly, both Kinsella's Web of Hate (winter 1994) and Raymont's documentary (1995) were released after the Front had essentially ended as an active organization in 1993. Groups which play the Hollywood Nazi card have very short life spans but their legacy seemingly never dies. The progressive-minority coalition, which is notorious for its propagandistic milking, does everything possible to sustain the memory of groups such as the Heritage Front even well after they ceased to exist. Hence, the release of White Lies four to five years after the Front had been active should come as no surprise.

The Opening Scenes
White Lies is rife with images, particularly evident in the opening scenes. Clearly the intention to spook the audience from beginning to end.

The movie opens to show a dark background and a shot of the moon which then turns into a drop of blood that falls into what appears to be a puddle of blood. We then see paint brush being stroked across a canvas, forming words that are apparently written in blood. We are then shown a drop of blood dripping from the hand of what appears to be a lifeless body. This blood drop falls into another puddle of blood and then we see a shot of a dangling foot which extends to the leg and then a shot of a wooden sign with the words "Race Traitor." The shot then returns to the body and we see that the sign was attached to the body which we now see hung from a rope with a cover over the head. At this point some opera-style singing commences which provides an eerie, funeral-like atmosphere.

A series of shots follow, including one of a row of bodies hanging from lamp posts and appearing similar to the one in the original shot. We are shown these bodies in various positions and are also shown what appears to be a young man running away. Later, a pen in someone's and writing words on a piece of paper, word that are simultaneously spoken in a nervous female voice: "Every time I turn a corner I'm afraid they'll be there. I don't want to be around when they kick the door in. Now everyday is the day of the rope."

One of the opportunities for denigration provided to the progressive-minority coalition, is the tendency of fanatical pro-White groups to worship a former terrorist group led by the late Bob Matthews called The Order. In the mid-1980's The Order orchestrated a number of bank robberies and killed Denver talk show host Alan Berg all in the name of "White liberation." The Order was inspired by a novel called The Turner Diaries which is imagined to have been written by a member of a revolutionary White resistance group in the United States. The success of this group (so goes the story) saved the White Majority from what seemed like imminent destruction. Their racial revolutionary victory remains highly symbolic to fanatical White separatists. Particularly appealing to them is the chapter entitled "The Day of the Rope" where those who had worked against the interests of these White revolutionaries were promptly hanged from lamp-posts. White Lies takes full advantage of this symbolic lamp-post fetish. Frequently, before and after commercial breaks, it shows wrapped bodies hanging from ropes, with dripping blood.

The Assembly: Introducing Catherine Chapman
From these spooky and macabre scenes we are taken to a packed auditorium where an anti-racist leader by the name of Alan Green is being given an ovation as he is reaching the end of a speech that is "kicking off" this High School's "One World Week." The Green character is to some extent based upon Bernie Farber of the Canadian Jewish Congress, who it is alleged "rescued" Elizabeth Moore from the clutches of the Heritage Front. The crowd is multiracial and become quiet as Green finishes his speech with these words: "Canada is the best place on earth in which to live: multiracial, multicultural, caring, tolerant. But it is that kind of freedom which allows us to be the world's greatest distributor of hate literature. It is that kind of uncomfortable truth that we must confront in order to protect your future."

After appearing somewhat disturbed at Green's "shocking" words, the members of the audience erupts into another ovation. He then solicits questions and this is where we get our first look at Catherine Chapman (played by Sarah Polley) whose character is based upon Elizabeth Moore. Chapman is a thin-looking, blonde-haired teenager who stands out because she does not appear comfortable with what Green has said. She is not applauding and instead folds her arms in a defensive fashion and then looks down. She makes a half-hearted gesture of raising her hand, only to change her mind, but not before Green notices and asks her to go to the microphone in the aisle. She tells Green about having recently applied for a "job at the mall" and that she was asked whether she was bilingual, to which she replied "Sure. I have six years of French." The interviewer said "Sorry. I meant Cantonese"; which elicited a slight laugh from the audience. We are then shown an Oriental female who is sitting to Chapman's right, not liking the scene.

Green's response  to the young woman's words is: "So you weren't qualified. Do you have a problem with that?" Chapman then asks: "How many languages do I need to flip burgers?" Green replies "Some would say the more the better. Others would say that's a classic racist statement. Now was that your intention or do you just need to think a little more about what you're saying?" Chapman: "It's just a question."

The question Chapman poses is actually valid. Were we ever told that getting an ordinary job would require Cantonese or any other non-official language? No we weren't. Can any Majority member be blamed for being concerned over such a shocking discovery? Of course not. However, and not surprisingly, Green's "progressive" character attaches the term "racist" to Chapman's question. A sensitive question of the kind Chapman asks commonly evokes an insensitive answer from those who appear to be most enlightened.

The Essay: Christmas is Dead
After the assembly Chapman is shown walking away from the auditorium. She is then shown in a classroom where a teacher is handing back essays to students. Chapman's essay , which is titled Christmas is Dead, has been given an "F." Chapman expresses shock at the result, to which the teacher responds: "Give it another try. You didn't quite catch the spirit of the day." Chapman then asks yet another excellent question: "But what about what I was saying?" To which the teacher replies: "Frankly, it was inappropriate but I'm giving you another chance (to re-write)." Chapman balks at the offer to be allowed to re-write her essay and informs the teacher that she will "take the F."

In our multicultural society it appears that the Majority will not be allowed to defend some or most "traditions" without a struggle and nowhere is this more evident than in the growing controversy surrounding Christmas. This is one issue that clearly demonstrates the painful realities of multiculturalism. White Lies very effectively touches on predicament in this regard. After receiving the failing grade Chapman is shown walking away from her class, and her voice over commences: "The other day a famous man accused me of being 'racist' for simply asking a question. Well I've got lots more." As she enters a bus the voice-over continues:

-Why is tolerance a one-way street?

-What happened to the golden rule? Because it seems to be that some cultures and their celebrations are more equal than others. Example: At this school we can't even sing Christmas carols anymore. Excuse me, I mean winterfest songs. They banned Silent Night.

-What's so offensive about peace on earth, good will towards men?

-We're so afraid of offending anybody that we've dumped on our own culture.

-If you ask me, trading the baby Jesus in for Frosty the Snowman is a bum deal.

-It kind of makes you wonder: If your culture's has become invisible maybe you have too.

These are excellent questions and White Lies would have been a much better film had it made an honest attempt to answer them. However, we are living in the New Canadian Multicultural Order, which ensures that the film would avoid profiling what life is really like for the average member of the White Majority such as Chapman. Instead, we are treated to yet another overworked "look at how dangerous the far-right is" masterpiece.

Chapman Connects With NIM
Later that day Chapman is shown on the internet. She is feeling melancholy due to the day's events, and while while online participates in a discussion dealing with free speech. All of the participants express concern about censorship. The participants are then informed about a "contest" for the "best letter" prize  among those feeling "burned." The prize is $50 and Chapman submits her Christmas is Dead essay for which she has received a failing grade by her teacher. She is contacted informing her that she has won the contest and her spirits are lifted. She meets Erina at a pool hall. Erina's character is loosely based on that of another former Heritage Front activist Ellisse Hategan. Hategan, as did Moore, defected to the anti-racist side, and in real life the two did establish some sort of friendship but not to the extent portrayed in the movie. Catherine Chapman and Erina have a conversation while playing pool and Ms. Chapman is given the $50 prize money.

It turns out that the essay contest has been sponsored by the "National Identity Movement" (NIM) and they are planning to publish her article in their organ. Chapman is thrilled. NIM is of course equivalent to The Heritage Front. Erina invites Chapman to a party at the Z-Launch (obviously corresponds to be the house of Holocaust revisionist Ernst Zundel) where she is introduced to other NIM members. She is astonished to discover how many people are raving about her essay and at receiving celebrity-style treatment. She is then invited upstairs where she is introduced to Mrs. K to whom the house belongs. Mrs. K is based upon the real life Ernst Zundel and the gender switch in this case is interesting. Mrs. K, along with everyone else who has met her, is glowing. She looks at Chapman with almost religious admiration and tells her "You're exactly what we're looking for." This is one of the movie's many hyperbolic moments. Elizabeth Moore is a talented writer, but Front members were much more restrained in their appreciation than their equivalents in the film.

Chapman is brought into the computer/video editing room. Shortly after a firebomb is thrown through the window of this room. Equipment is damaged and a NIM activist winds up in hospital.

After seeing anti-racist activist Alan Green on TV justifying the bombing while at the hospital bedside of the injured NIM activist, Chapman recollects Green accusing her of being "racist in front of her whole school" and that she now feels as if she is "walking around with a target on her back." In response one activist says: "Welcome to the club." Then: "What have they got against you?" Erina replies: "They don't like what we say." The NIM leader: "That's right, our terrible hate-filled belief that the majority rules." Chapman: "They have to have more against you than that to be bombing you." The NIM leader: "No. We're not the first people in history to be persecuted for our ideas. All I'm saying is that this obsession with the rights of the minority is only hurting the rest of us." Erina adds: "But cross that politically correct line and bang! you're a sexist, or a racist, or a nazi. Once they've labelled you they're allowed to bomb you."

Victimhood of all these "majoritarians" has clearly been established. Chapman shakes her head and comments: "It's so twisted." The next scene shows the NIM leader along with Erina and Chapman standing at the edge of a cliff at sundown. There is an exchange which ends with the NIM leader telling Chapman: "You have friends now." (An ironic and artistic touch.)

At this point NIM appears to be urging rather reasonable concerns about political correctness, obsession over minority rights, and free speech. Chapman's interest in the group doesn't seem all that unreasonable.

The Shifting Tide: The Vilification of NIM
The image of "victimized" pro-White activists has been built up to be demolished. Demolition begins when White Lies starts to contrive the justifications for what has happened to NIM and to demonstrate that Chapman has indeed been told some White Lies.

NIM's "all we want is the opportunity to express ourselves" lament starts to unravel when Chapman, Erina and a  very aggressive male NIM activist are shown doing some posturing. Shortly after they wind up on a bus where they distribute some flyers to passengers. The male's obnoxious causes disturbance. The passengers, particularly the visible minority ones, are shaken and humiliated by his manner. The threesome then make their way to a skinhead concert. The lyrics are loud and furious and feature praise of Hitler and a refutation of the "six million" atrocity allegations. Ian, the singer, takes a break and is then introduced to Chapman. He is very handsome and is also the love interest of Erina. He makes a crude remark about Chapman's breasts and Chapman snaps back: "So you figure that six million people were abducted by aliens?" Clearly, Chapman is not entirely in sync with these people, and her association with them is becoming awkward.

The singer (Ian) goes back on stage and along with his band starts roaring some White power lyrics. Both Chapman and Erina start to dance along with everyone else and Erina offers the following interesting remark:
"In the 60's the kids said 'screw you' to the Establishment. This is the 'screw you' of the 90's." (This is a grotesque overstatement. The countercultural movements of the 1960's can hardly be compared to the extremely small and ephemeral pro-White groups of the 1990's.)

A relationship develops between Chapman and Ian. While at Ian's place Chapman makes a remark about the enormous amount of nazi paraphernalia in the singer's room. Ian then claims that the nazis were the "good guys", prompting Chapman to ask: "Are you going to tell me that Zyclon B was bug repellent?" (In the revisionist spirit Chapman should have asked "Are you doing to tell me that Zyclon B was used primarily for delousing infected clothing?) Ian then gives Chapman his revisionist perspective on the holocaust.

The love scenes between Chapman and Ian, which at one point show them wrapped in a Nazi flag,
are fitted in between scenes of three NIM members dressed in black clothing and wearing balaclavas. They are preparing to bomb a synagogue. This bombing is without question the movie's most dramatic scene, intended to  clearly established NIM as an evil entity. Talk about "equal rights for Whites" and "free speech" goes all to hell after this horrific spectacle (a "holocaust" of one innocent cleaner of a synagogue).

The exploding synagogue and the burning cleaner is outrageous, manipulative and slanting. There has never been such an attack on a synagogue in Canada, and if there had been and had someone been burned in the process it would have generated headlines for months. This segment of the film shows White Lies at its hysterical best (or worst).

Chapman's Burning Conscience
The bombing is a turning point for Erina, who tries to convince Chapman that NIM is responsible. She pleads with Chapman to "wake up." Chapman doesn't believe Erina and is shocked to discover that Erina is now on the side of the anti-racist leader Alan Green. Erina is clearly spooked and expresses fear that she is going to be "hung on a lamp post."

Then Chapman begins to realize that she has been deceived by NIM and that they are not simply the pro-free speech organization she thought they were. She is present during a night-time brawl in an alley between NIM members and several others during which she herself at one point participates in the violence. This uncharacteristic outburst of violence deeply disturbs Chapman. She is shocked that she could have ever done something so drastic.

Chapman's conscience is further disturbed when on the way to a neo-nazi/skinhead rally she and Ian stop to "help" a visible minority male and his son who are stranded on the side of the road with their car. Ian winds up harassing the father and he throws away some car parts that the father is using to repair the car. Chapman pleads with Ian "not to do it" but he didn't listen. This is a crude attempt at reinforcing the image of the brutal White racist victimizing the innocent visible minority. It is indeed a painful though too obviously contrived sequence.

Chapman discovers that there are plans to make her NIM's "new face." She has been scheduled to do a television interview the next week. A rally at this point features extensive target practice on images of Erina, who (unbelievably) is now NIM's arch enemy. The keynote speaker is a firebrand racial clergyman. This rally features extensive "hail victory" salutes, Swastika flags and Ku Klux Klan hoods. Chapman is honoured by the speaker and is called up to the stage where is she given a torch to light the large wooden cross.

The Television Interview
Chapman debates Alan Green on television and denies that NIM is violent. She almost gets the better of Green, doing extremely well. However, her university roommates, family and Erina are watching and she is therefore no longer "behind the scenes.". After the show she is seen vomiting in the station's washroom. Green is then savagely attacked in the station's underground parking lot and is hospitalized.

Shortly after, Chapman visits one of the accused of the synagogue bombings in jail and is surprised to hear that he has not been visited by anyone from NIM. The prisoner is disillusioned and has become bitter towards the pro-White movement. He gives Erina credit for getting out and claims the movement is "a joke." A rift begins between Chapman and Ian, and the latter throws a childish tantrum emphasizing the essential meanness of his character.

Ostracism Begins
Chapman's is seen vomiting again this time in her university dorm. We then see her Asian roommate moving out. Erina informs Chapman that she is leaving to "start a new life." She encourages Chapman to "do the same." Clearly a bond still exists between the two young women even though NIM has thoroughly demonized Erina. (Undoubtedly this is a bow to the sisterhood.) Nevertheless, Erina cannot bear the severe and continuing harassment. She hangs herself. (In real life Ellisse Hategan, upon whom the Erina character is based, did not commit suicide and is still very much alive and well. This is another example of White Lies contriving propaganda for the masses that drastically misrepresents reality.)

The last straw for Champan's conscience is when she attends a Holocaust exhibit. Chapman is deeply touched by what she sees and this is a major turning point. She subsequently visits the anti-racist leader Green in the hospital and asks for his help. He agrees to help and asks Chapman for NIM's membership and mailing lists which she does get for him. (Curiously, Chapman is also shown about this time coolly making an appointment with an abortion clinic. Is this intended to indicate how completely she has come to her senses?)

The Press Conference
Chapman's defection is now complete. She is shown standing at Green's side while giving an outdoor press conference. The first question posed is, not surprisingly, "Do you believe in the Holocaust?" Chapman: "Yes. Yes I do. I didn't have all the facts before. I wanted to believe them so I accepted what they said." This of course isn't good enough. "So you're not a racist anymore?" Chapman: "I agree with the person who said you can dabble in violence and drugs but you can't dabble in hate. I feel like my insecurities and my anger made me stop seeing people as individuals." "Oh yeah? And you do now?" Chapman: "You know a lot of people think that if you're white you're automatically racist unless you struggle against it. So you know now I'm struggling." Someone else shouted: "Too late!" (Well, at least this shows that racists have no monopoly on meanness!)

A reporter asks: "Why should anyone believe that your conversion is real? (Use of the term "conversion" is most appropriate given that what is happening at this press conference, is that Chapman is being treated as a former heretic being subject to a religious interrogation by Inquisitors determined to demonstrate that she has not truly renounced her racial heresy.) Chapman: "Look, I joined the movement because (pause), they saw me. I wasn't  invisible anymore. It gave me something to fight for. I don't know what else there is."

From this press conference we are brought to another hostile environment. Chapman is shown at her university dorm where she is making her way down the hall after having gathered her belongings. The other students are staring at her as if she were some sort of monster.

What Was The Point?
The fact that Elizabeth Moore (the real life version of Catherine Chapman) would bounce from one extreme (White fanaticism) to the other (anti-racism) indicates a deep psychological imbalance well beyond the mere lack of confidence and social confusion the film portrays. The film went to great lengths to portray Chapman as a "victim" of seduction on the part of the NIM, but would such a character have been so utterly deceived by thugs? The progressive-minority coalition does not want an honest analysis of Canada's multiracial experiment known as multiculturalism. Being told one must speak Cantonese to work in a fast food establishment in Canada, being given a failing grade for writing an essay lamenting the "death of Christmas," being subjected to heretical treatment, are all telling signs that something is deeply wrong with our grand multicultural experiment. (In this respect, the film is portraying what is true and important.)

The transformation of society from a predominantly White to a multiracial one is far more significant than the antics of marginal groups such as The Heritage Front. Promotion of racial guilt, demonization for being White, censorship, political correctness, attacks upon Majority traditions, and so on, are far more worthy of analysis.

Things have not turned out the way they were supposed to, and there is nothing the White Majority would
appreciate more than a portrayal of what it's like to live in a society where we must accept grotesque racial double standards that favour minorities, have our traditions attacked as "racist," and be forced to function on a minefield of racial sensitivity where the slightest word, look or gesture might lead to a damaging accusation of "racism."

The fact that a film with the title "White Lies" was actually produced for mass viewing is an excellent example of the double standard lamented by the Chapman character. It would not be permissible to make a movie with the title "Black Lies," or "Jewish Lies," or "Minority Lies." The progressive-minority coalition would cry foul anyone ever attempted to make a Majority equivalent of White Lies.

On the surface White Lies seeks to shock and horrify the audience with the horrible deeds of dreaded White racists. However, the events that caused the Chapman character's racial frustration and made her ripe for a connection with NIM were suspiciously well done. Even if Chapman did get on the wrong track by becoming active with NIM, the questions she posed while riding home from school on a city bus were never adequately answered.

So what was the film telling us at the beginning about what Chapman went through? She was clearly shown to have legitimate concerns about the double standards and political correctness she faced, without being portrayed as a racist. She was at first a perceptive and questioning teenage girl who due to lack of confidence joined a group with whom she never should have become involved. This point was clearly made.

However, what if the Chapman character had not connected with NIM? How would she have dealt with her concerns and frustration? Was she and is every other member of the White Majority in real life supposed to just grit their teeth and accept the unfair hand which multiculturalism has dealt them? Are we supposed to accept the double standards, the political correctness and perpetual attacks on our traditions out of fear of being labelled "racist" or "White supremacist"?  Do we risk being subjected to trials for heresy similar to the one that Chapman was required to endure  when she tried to make amends after having left NIM?

Could it be that the film has presented such questions in code, and then has proceeded "to do what it had to do" with the neo-nazi stuff in order to make the film acceptable in a politically correct society? Possibly. But it is as likely that, in order to further sophisticated propaganda, elements of the truth have been pressed into the service of an ideological distortion of the truth.

Are you a Writer?  Submit you pieces to be included on the Controversial Columnists Page!  Just E-Mail it to 


The Freedom-Site has been online since 1996 and served over 10 Million Visitors

Your Donations = Our Survival
C.P.N., 152 Carlton Street, Suite 545, Toronto, Ontario, M5A 2K1, Canada
Please send what you can to help keep our website operational