Free Speech Advocate Takes on Self-Styled Net Nazi Hunter
Date: Thursday, November 26, 1998 4:51:18 AMDate: Wednesday, November 25, 1998 12:58:14 PMFrom: [email protected]Subj: U-Group: Re: Zundel my hero! Or a nut???In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:> In <[email protected]>, on Sun, 22 Nov 1998 09:10:03 +0000,> ASMarques
Is this what Albertans consider to be off-topic in general Canadian newsgroups: A discussion of the worst attack on Canadian civil rights since Confederation?
Listen here, John Morris. The Federal government of Canada is running a monkey trial prosecution right now for crime-speak. You want to trash the civil liberties of all Canadians just so can get use the power of law to silence one political enemy: Ernst Zundel. That is outrageous.
You pretend otherwise, but the simplicity of freedom of speech is that it is FREE. That means the government does not monitor your speech, and it means there are no forbidden topics or forbidden opinions.
Oh, I know. Those who are prosecuting Zundel have carefully phrased their made-to-order law so that it circumvents the principle of free speech, just like Michael Jordan dibbling around a lamp post. They have said that Zundel's words MIGHT make people angry, and anger is LIKE hatred, and people who are hateful MIGHT commit crimes, and therefore Zundel is producing a precursor to crime and should be silenced.
But this line of reasoning is clumsy and dangerous. If Canadians permit these definitions to go forward and this precedent to be established, they will have handed every tin-pot dictator and billion-dollar pressure group a 20 lb. hammer to destroy every legal protection Canadians now enjoy.
Look at it carefully: What if someone reads a newspaper expose on Asian crime gangs, then goes out and burns down the house next door because it belongs to a little Chinese lady? Does that mean the newspaper is guilty of hate-speak? What if I read “Bonfire of the Vanities” and decide to take a pot-shot at the next stockbroker I meet? Is the author of “Bonfire” responsible?
That assertion is, in simple terms, nuts. You cannot hold writers responsible for the actions of their readers. And in the case of Zundel, there have been only the vaguest connections between any literature of Zundel's and violent crime. The assertion of Zundel's prosecutors is that the literature MIGHT cause hate-crime. Run that one into the lab and prove it!
Of course, the reason Zundel is being prosecuted is very simple: Zundel is exposing the biggest scam of the 20th century. He has pointed out that Israel is founded on a lie, and that billions of dollars are bilked from the Christian countries every year on the basis of that lie.
Oops. Talk about offending a vested interest–Zundel has obviously taken on the granddaddy of them all, and they intend to make him suffer for it. They argue that if someone discovered that her purse was stolen with $20 in it, she might get angry. And if she discovered she had just been cheated out of $20 billion, she might get even angrier. And vested interests don't like people to get angry at them, particularly tax payers who have been functioning as maple sugar tree for the last half-century. Tax payers should, in the view of these special interests, know as little as possible beyond what they are told and where to send the check.
That is the simplicity of it. That law is simply a protect-the- powerful-vested-interest law. Canada is about to embark on a national policy that says it is illegal to expose any widespread corruption ON THE BASIS THAT the people who are being swindled might get angry, they might take remedial action, and there goes the sweet little operation the gangsters have been enjoying.
The people of BC should know well how this works: Back in 1986 the people were angry at the abuse of BC forests by the big timber scalpers. Statistics showed that the forests were not being cut and re-seeded at a sustainable rate. The BC government got involved (as you might expect when Big Business is threatened) and they passed a law that made all forestry statistics government confidential.
And it worked. No more public protest.
But John Morris, allegedly of the University of Alberta, hasn't the faintest idea how all this works. He probably thinks that water is produced by the taps in his bathtub, and if only world had more taps, there would be no water shortage problems. He thinks government is kept honest by voters: If the people vote on the basis of the information published by the government and vested interests, the people will keep the government honest.
John Morris, allegedly of the University of Alberta, hasn't the faintest idea that only free speech, a free press, and open government have the faintest hope of keeping any government honest and the hands of vested interests in their own pockets where they belong.
John Morris is pitiful. He is a cow in the pasture who begs the farmer to milk him regularly.
Or maybe John Morris is connected with the vested interests. Who can say?
—Slade
“Look out, Canada, Zundel has a printing press
and he knows how to use it!
Use your lawyers and aim for his rights!
Is this what they put people in prison for???
http://www.webcom.com/ezundel (now http://www.zundelsite.org)
Date: Friday, November 27, 1998 4:50:19 PMFrom: [email protected]Subj: U-Group: Re: Zundel my hero! Or a nut???qc.politique,can.politics,can.gov.general,bc.generalIn article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:> In <[email protected]>, on Wed, 25 Nov 1998 20:57:23> GMT, [email protected] wrote:> > >In article <[email protected]>,> > > [email protected] wrote:> >> In <[email protected]>, on Sun, 22 Nov 1998 09:10:03 +0000,> > >> ASMarques
A scholar! So sure of yourself, and so abusive in your certainty!
But you do not mention Bill S-5, passed June 30, 1998. Best that the members of this discussion not know about that one, eh? Let me quote their web page text for you, because you are bound to get it wrong the next time this comes up, and we'll have to go through this all over again:
Parliament Amends Canadian Human Rights Act
Canada's legislators have taken a major step forward in protecting and enhancing the rights of Canadians. Bill S-5, which includes important amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act, received all-party support in the House of Commons in May. The legislation came into force on June 30, 1998.
The amendments include many long sought by the Commission. Of particular importance is the addition to the Act of a provision that requires employers and service providers to accommodate special needs, such as those of religious minorities or people with disabilities, short of undue hardship.
The amendments enhance the Commission's independence by allowing the CHRC to report directly to Parliament, rather than through the Minister of Justice, as has been the practice to this point.
Provisions dealing with hate propaganda have been strengthened, allowing victims specifically identified in hate messages to receive compensation. The individual responsible for disseminating the hate propaganda may also be ordered to pay a penalty of up to $10,000.
As a result of the legislation, the previous human rights tribunal panel, whose members were appointed on a part-time basis, has been replaced by a permanent 15-member tribunal. The legislation also increases the maximum amount a tribunal can award in damages from $5,000 to $20,000. Cases which are currently before the tribunal will continue; any new cases, however, will be referred to the new tribunal.
The amended Act also allows policy complaints, which do not require an individual victim of discrimination, to be filed for discrimination related to services as well as employment. It allows the CHRC to investigate and deal with complaints of retaliation; in the past, such complaints could only be dealt with through criminal law.
These amendments represent the first phase of a review of the Canadian Human Rights Act; the government has committed itself to conducting a more comprehensive review in the future. The world in which Canadians live and work is very different now than it was when the Canadian Human Rights Act came into force 20 years ago, and there are likely to be more changes ahead as we enter the 21st century. A further review of the Act will ensure that human rights issues of concern to Canadians are addressed effectively, and we look forward to engaging all Canadians in this initiative.
Sounds innoccuous, doesn't it?
Section 52 is now amended to permit secret trials:
“Confidentiality of application:
(2) If the member or panel considers it appropriate, the member or panel may take any measures and make any order that the member or panel considers necessary to ensure the confidentiality of a hearing held in respect of an application under subsection (1).
Section 54(1) is amended to apply to “hate messages”:
28. Subsection 54(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:
Orders relating to hate messages
54.
- If a member or panel finds that a complaint related to a discriminatory practice described in section 13 is substantiated, the member or panel may make only one or more of the following orders:
- an order containing terms referred to in paragraph 53(2)(a);
- an order under subsection 53(3) to compensate a victim specifically identified in the communication that constituted the discriminatory practice; and
- an order to pay a penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars.
But there are volumes of other amendments there, seemingly worded for application to emplyment descrimination, but as we see in the Zundel trial, applicable to anything they damned well please.
Note also that the application to a jury is not available to the accused. So sorry. It was a nuisance, anyway.
As for the Federal Government running a monkey trial, the Canadian> Human Rights Commission is obliged to answer complaints from private> citizens. CHRC did not initiate the current hearings against Zuendel.
There is every reason to believe this is EXACTLY a “monkey” trial. If you look it up, you will see that John Thomas Scopes was specifically sent to that Tennesseee teaching position by the ACLU in order to provoke his prosecution, which became the 1925 “monkey” trial of “Inheret the Wind” (i.e.: teaching evolution in the schools). The comparison is apt because the CHRC historically takes up to two years to get to a complaint. They managed to locate a complaint against Zundel under the new law and bring it to a hearing within a few months. It is obvious that the law, the complaint, and the hearings were on greased skids to make sure Zundel was on trial with the biggest and the baddest they had to offer. But while we are on the subject, look what Canada has in the chute for 1999:
http://www.nationalpost.com/news.asp?f=981125/2047905.html
National Post • Wednesday, November 25, 1998
Crackdown on hate materials planned
Criminal code reforms: Tougher laws would include penalties, hard drive seizures
Jim Bronskill
Southam News
Possession of hate propaganda for the purpose of distributing it to others could soon be a crime. The measure is among several planned Criminal Code reforms aimed at toughening laws against the spread of hatred. The package will include specific new penalties for the desecration of churches, cemeteries, and other institutions — a response to such crimes as the spray-painting of swastikas on gravestones and synagogues. It would also include a Criminal Code revision allowing police to seize computer hard drives containing hate propaganda.
Another move would prevent those charged with promoting hatred from using the defence of truth based on a denial of the Holocaust or any other historically recognized act of genocide.
Federal and provincial justice ministers quietly agreed to the changes recently during a meeting in Regina.
“There was unanimous support for the principles here, that hate-motivated violence is something that we condemn,” said Pierre Gratton, press secretary to Justice Minister Anne McLellan. Federal justice officials are studying the planned revisions with the aim of bringing in legislation next year, Mr. Gratton said yesterday.
Current Criminal Code provisions prohibit anyone from inciting hatred against members of an identifiable group distinguished by colour, race, religion, or ethnic origin.
Under the changes, the list of characteristics would be expanded to include sex, sexual orientation, age, and mental or physical disability. The new offence concerning possession would apply to those who have hate propaganda for the purpose of distributing it with the intention of promoting hate.
The provision will make it easier to crack down on hatemongers while protecting the right of people to openly discuss controversial issues, said Ujjal Dosanjh, British Columbia's attorney-general, who has been pushing for adoption of the new measures.
“It would preserve academic freedom, freedom of expression and all of those values that we cherish,” Mr. Dosanjh said yesterday in an interview.
“Promotion of hatred isn't a value that we cherish as Canadians, and that's where it would stop.”
Like it? It's yours.
—Slade
“Look out, Canada, Zundel has a printing press
and he knows how to use it!
Use your lawyers and aim for his rights!
Is this what they put people in prison for???
http://www.webcom.com/ezundel (now http://www.zundelsite.org)
Author
Bibliographic information about this document: n/a
Other contributors to this document: n/a
Editor’s comments: n/a