Slashdot Mirror

http://ezralevant.com/2011/10/free-speechs-only-hope.html.

I love the way he prioritizes between truth and religion:
"the truth is not a defense, éven religious belief is not a defense"

In Canada, we do not have free speech in absolute terms like our southern counterparts. The difference between us and what those senators are suggesting is that we have a Charter of Rights which protects us from any attempt of gov't approved censorship. It can be annoying at times, but it keeps the holocaust deniers at bay.

We actually have massive government-perpetrated censorship. So-called "human rights commissions", which are government bureaucracies, impose large fines, with no real legal recourse, on those targets (carefully chosen, of course) who violate the supposed rights of others not to be offended. As long as those others are members of the correct groups, of course.

I know a lot of people in general, and Slashdot readers in particular, won't/don't agree with many of Ezra Levant's positions, but he's done more to shine disinfecting sunlight on the HRCs than all the "civil liberties" groups in Canada combined. Googling his name and doing some reading will quickly show just how fragile supposed freedom of speech really is in Canada. That may be gradually changing, thankfully - there are movements afoot to remove or re-word Section 13 of the Human Rights Act so that just hurting someone's feelings is no longer an offense. In fact, Ezra just did a segment on his show about it: http://ezralevant.com/2011/10/free-speechs-only-hope.html.

The solution to Holocaust deniers is not to stifle everyone's freedom of speech. Let them say their piece, then let the rest of us refute, rebuke, and roundly mock.

As someone mentioned, this is a "civil" affair. Richard Warman is suing the moderators of FreeDominion.ca and many other conservative bloggers because they have criticized him (see http://ezralevant.com/2008/04/richard-warman-has-sued-me-and.html). This is part of a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) to prevent the critics of Mr. Warman from publishing information on how he, with the complicity of the federal government under the Canadian Human Rights Commission, is attempting to censor speech in Canada.

If this were happening in Canada, I'd start publishing every link I could on every website I could, and ask (no, beg) for trial date, and with a jury.

I think we have some daft politicians in the Conservative Party here, but looking at Australia ... maybe we aren't as bad off as I though? Yet ......

In fact, it's the Conservative Party which is starting to rein in the excesses of the "human rights commision" Star Chambers which have been working hard at eliminating freedom of speech in Canada.

Staff at the "human rights commissions" have been caught breaking into websites, spreading hate themselves, outright lying, and even worse. One of their "prosecutors" even admitted it

Read the "human rights" stories on Ezra Levant's blog: http://ezralevant.com/

I like the one where a "prosecutor" refuses to do his job because he wasn't in a "serene state of mind".

If this were happening in Canada, I'd start publishing every link I could on every website I could, and ask (no, beg) for trial date, and with a jury.

I think we have some daft politicians in the Conservative Party here, but looking at Australia ... maybe we aren't as bad off as I though? Yet ......

In fact, it's the Conservative Party which is starting to rein in the excesses of the "human rights commision" Star Chambers which have been working hard at eliminating freedom of speech in Canada.

Staff at the "human rights commissions" have been caught breaking into websites, spreading hate themselves, outright lying, and even worse. One of their "prosecutors" even admitted it

Read the "human rights" stories on Ezra Levant's blog: http://ezralevant.com/

I like the one where a "prosecutor" refuses to do his job because he wasn't in a "serene state of mind".

the *vast majority* of Muslims don't believe that bullshit either.

That is not my experience with Mulsims here in Canada. To various degrees, essentially all support the cause.

you don't see Muslims protesting against suicide terrorists.

This is correct--and it's because the first comment of yours that I quoted is incorrect. Many Muslims not involved in actual violence are involved in supportive roles, especially moral support. Others do things such as run what is known as "soft jihad" (see http://ezralevant.com/2008/07/lawfare-a-tactic-of-the-soft-j.html for one example).

The Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and the B'nai Brith claim in paragraph 4 of their joint brief, they're "representatives of the Canadian Jewish community" and that Canadian Jews "rely heavily on anti hate-speech legislation, such as section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, for their physical and psychological security."

See: http://ezralevant.com/2008/05/hows-your-psychological-securi.html

Ah, well that explains it.

there are good Canadian blogs? Feel free to link me some interesting ones

1. In Canada restrictions on charter rights ARE justified and this is well established in in jurisprudence. "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." (Charter 1.1)2. Free speech is important, nobody is debating that. But there have to be limits on free speech when they can demonstrably justified. I cannot say ANYTHING I want about Jews/Muslims/Blacks/Gays in ANY forum at ANY time, especially when I target one group and I could impact THEIR right to live a happy and free life.

You are factually inaccurate. You certainly can write some of the things you want about Jews/Muslims/Blacks/Gays in some forums some of the time, depending what you want to write about.

The Muslims are treading on very dangerous ground. If the standard is going to be "likely to expose a person ... to hatred or contempt because of race, religion, age, disability, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.", then the Koran will soon be banned. After all, the Koran sets the penalty for homosexuality as death, and this actively carried out in the Muslim world.

3. Mark Steyn's thesis is that muslims are taking over the west, "breeding like mosquitoes," and that they plan to replace our western legal system with Sharia law. And he is pretty offensive in the way he argues it. But the REAL issue of why he's on trial is because McLean's magazine (Canada's largest circulated magazine) has him as a regular contributer while refusing to let anyone offer a rebuttal. So, people complained.

Mark Steyn is not Maclean's. Maclean's is a magazine printed by a corporation. Mark Steyn occasionally writes in Maclean's and other magazines & newspapers. Mark Steyn is not responsible for the actions of Maclean's.

Maclean's (like any magazine) has the right not to print what they don't want. If you don't like that, get the fuck out of my country and go live in a hellhole dictatorship where freedom of the press doesn't exist.

There are lots of magazines, newspapers, websites, blogs - millions of ways to get your point of view across.

As for the "breeding like mosquitoes" comment, Steyn was quoting a famous Norwegian Muslim clergyman who said exactly that. If this statement is hateful and offensive, isn't it odd that the Muslim community isn't condemning the Norwegian Muslim clergyman?

The real reason Steyn is on trial is that some of the Muslims noticed some of the ridiculous laws on the books in Canada. By and large, these laws haven't been used until very recently, so their idiocy has not been apparent. Go want Ezra Levant's interrogation by an investigator from one of these kangaroo courts, where he thoroughly demolishes them.

I would suggest checking out the blog of Ezra Levant, mentioned in the National Post story. Levant was brought up before the Alberta Human Rights Commission for publishing the Danish cartoons and follows the "human rights" commissions closely.

Here is a short video from his interrogation and a quote from his blog: "And after I made [my point], [Human Rights] Officer [Shirlene] McGovern said 'you're entitled to your opinions, that's for sure.' Well, actually, I'm not, am I? That's the reason I was sitting there. I don't have the right to my opinions, unless she says I do."

And here is another video from the interrogation in which Levant expresses his disgust at being directed to answer to the government and characterizes the human rights officer as a thug.

I would suggest checking out the blog of Ezra Levant, mentioned in the National Post story. Levant was brought up before the Alberta Human Rights Commission for publishing the Danish cartoons and follows the "human rights" commissions closely.

Here is a short video from his interrogation and a quote from his blog: "And after I made [my point], [Human Rights] Officer [Shirlene] McGovern said 'you're entitled to your opinions, that's for sure.' Well, actually, I'm not, am I? That's the reason I was sitting there. I don't have the right to my opinions, unless she says I do."

And here is another video from the interrogation in which Levant expresses his disgust at being directed to answer to the government and characterizes the human rights officer as a thug.

I would suggest checking out the blog of Ezra Levant, mentioned in the National Post story. Levant was brought up before the Alberta Human Rights Commission for publishing the Danish cartoons and follows the "human rights" commissions closely.

Here is a short video from his interrogation and a quote from his blog: "And after I made [my point], [Human Rights] Officer [Shirlene] McGovern said 'you're entitled to your opinions, that's for sure.' Well, actually, I'm not, am I? That's the reason I was sitting there. I don't have the right to my opinions, unless she says I do."

And here is another video from the interrogation in which Levant expresses his disgust at being directed to answer to the government and characterizes the human rights officer as a thug.