Far-right group leader faces contempt charge

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
Motion served on Terry Tremaine alleges he posted anti-Semitic, racist material online in contravention of cease-and-desist order issued by Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

Globe and Mail Update
March 5, 2009 at 2:58 PM EST

A Regina mathematics professor with ultra-right leanings – Terry Tremaine – faces contempt of court charges for disobeying an order from the Canadian Human Rights Commission that he not post virulently racist material on the Internet.

A Federal Court of Canada motion served on Mr. Tremaine by the CHRC alleges that anti-Semitic, racist material posted on websites by Mr. Tremaine contravenes a 2007 cease-and-desist order issued by a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

Mr. Tremaine is the self-described head of the National Socialist Party of Canada – a far-right group which is viewed as a cousin of various white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups.

In addition to the contempt charge – which carries a penalty ranging from an unlimited fine to five years in prison – Mr. Tremaine is also facing a criminal charge for willfully promoting hatred.

Thursday's move was precipitated by Richard Warman, a federal government lawyer who has made it his mission to roust out far-right propagandists on the Internet.

In a 2004 affidavit that precipitated the CRHC's original action against Mr. Tremaine, Mr. Warman accused him of posting virulently racist hate material on Internet websites that could expose blacks, Asians, Aboriginals, other non-whites and persons of the Jewish faith to hatred or contempt.

On Feb. 2, 2007, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal agreed. It ordered Mr. Tremaine to cease posting his material on the Internet, and fined Mr. Tremaine $4,000.

Mr. Warman alleges in an affidavit that since the tribunal's decision, Mr. Tremaine's postings have disparaged immigrants, described Jews as “highly-evolved parasites,” and predicted that “the brown masses” will rise up and destroy Jews.

“Mr. Tremaine is free to hold repugnant views but Canada and virtually every other Western democracy have made it illegal to spread hate propaganda,” Mr. Warman said in an interview Thursday.

“If he wants to blatantly defy a Federal Court order then he brings the consequences on his own head,” he said. “Mr. Tremaine has had his day in Federal Court, and the judge described his hate propaganda attacking the Jewish, black, and aboriginal communities as extreme and malicious.

“It's up to Mr. Tremaine to change his heart, but in the meantime he needs to obey the law.”
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Mr. Tremaine is obviously a moron......laughable, a man who has, despite his best efforts, had little effect on society.......an pathetic excuse for a human being spewing forth what practically everybody recognizes as garbage.

He is insignificant.

I am infinitely more concerned about Mr. Warman, who apparently suffers from the delusion that his duty is to stifle the expression of thought that makes him uncomfortable............

Aided, of course, by "Human Rights" Commission Tribunals.....God what an exercise in Orwellian double-think!.....that work desperately to suppress the human right of freedom of speech. And judges that support their decisions....

Mr. Tremaine we could laugh at, poke fun at, easily show the stupidity of his ideas...... and if he tried to act on any of his ideas, we could smack him over the head with something large and heavy before any real damage was done.

The real damage has already been done by HR Commissions, in case after case after case where defendants are forced to spend tens of thousands to defend their right to free speech...........even if they win, they've lost......and even more significantly, society has lost, because it has come to accept that government regulation of the expression of thought is fully acceptable.

Outrageous.
 

Scott Free

House Member
May 9, 2007
3,893
46
48
BC
Maybe the tribunals will be used against religion next. The bible is full of hate and intolerance.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
This has nothing to do with Human Rights Commission. The original complaint may have been heard by the Human Rights Commission. However, the contempt order was issued by the Federal Court, so it is dishonest to pretend that it is a Human Rights Commission issue.

He is in contempt of the Courts now; it has nothing to do with Human Rights Commission. Mr. Tremain had a perfect right to appeal the HRC decision to courts, which I assume he didn’t do.

Now it has moved beyond the HRC, now it is between Courts and Mr. Tremain. The legal process will grind on, and if Mr. Tremain deserves any penalties or punishment, he will be given that. The process is working as it should and I don’t see anything wrong with that.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
the federal court has no right to issue a contempt of court issue to a command which is not from a court, and has no authority to issue one.

As this is a legal charge though, I hope he can argue that HR Tribunals are unconstitutional and they are banned.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
... I hope he can argue that HR Tribunals are unconstitutional and they are banned.

Or at the very least, held to a much narrower scope of investigation. Actual hate crimes, calls to arms against a group, calls for death. Or actual violations of human rights, like freedom of speech and freedom of association. But, then they might have to investigate themselves.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
This has nothing to do with Human Rights Commission. The original complaint may have been heard by the Human Rights Commission. However, the contempt order was issued by the Federal Court, so it is dishonest to pretend that it is a Human Rights Commission issue.

He is in contempt of the Courts now; it has nothing to do with Human Rights Commission. Mr. Tremain had a perfect right to appeal the HRC decision to courts, which I assume he didn’t do.

Now it has moved beyond the HRC, now it is between Courts and Mr. Tremain. The legal process will grind on, and if Mr. Tremain deserves any penalties or punishment, he will be given that. The process is working as it should and I don’t see anything wrong with that.

Pheck the "process"!

The "problem" is state control of freedom of thought and expression. I don't give a rat's ass if it is expressed through the CHRC (the storm troopers of thought police) or the courts.

It is completely unacceptable.

The foot in the door.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Or at the very least, held to a much narrower scope of investigation. Actual hate crimes, calls to arms against a group, calls for death. Or actual violations of human rights, like freedom of speech and freedom of association. But, then they might have to investigate themselves.

Actual hate crimes are covered by laws against assault, murder, harassment, etc.

IMHO, the laws against conspiracy and incitement cover any other problems.

Too much law.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
Actual hate crimes are covered by laws against assault, murder, harassment, etc.

IMHO, the laws against conspiracy and incitement cover any other problems.

Too much law.

I agree... nothing bothers me more than when we write more specific laws for things that existing laws already cover. Like cell phone laws. Frick. Police have always been able to pull over someone driving erratically while talking on their cell phone, as we've always had laws governing the operation with due care and attention of motor vehicles. Yet they feel they have to write one that actually explains it for the moron public, rather than just clarifying that existing laws cover it.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Or at the very least, held to a much narrower scope of investigation. Actual hate crimes, calls to arms against a group, calls for death. Or actual violations of human rights, like freedom of speech and freedom of association. But, then they might have to investigate themselves.

I would argue those should also go through the courts.

If someone is commiting a crime, they deserve a fair trial with the same legal protections we would give to someone who rapes then eats babies alive.

Its an utterly corrupt practice that should be stamped out before it spreads to other areas

"Traffic violations Tribunals", then "Domestic Tribunals" then "Fraud Tribunals"

people have a right to a fair trial, and this is an insidious creep that needs to stop, these things always start by targeting someone slimey (like bigots) then creep up from there.
 

Said1

Hubba Hubba
Apr 18, 2005
5,336
66
48
51
Das Kapital
He violated section 13 and the article about findings of the Canadian Human Rights Act (i think). The tribunal applies to the fed court for the contempt order on their cease and desist decision. The commission and the tribunal are not the same entities, although the tribunal hears cases referred by the commission - sort of ike the UN GA and the SC. The article is not very informative. :D
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
I have a slightly different approach to those who commit hate crimes, and make
hateful statements that hurt those who are of other races, and religions.


Pick them up by the scruff of the neck and the seat of the pants, and we all count
one --two--three and 'hurl' them into the ocean.(far off-shore).
Our country doesn't want them.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Only the Canadian Human Rights Commission could make one feel sorry for a Nazi
So is a nazi anybody not 100% supportive if all things Jewish (all thoughts and all actions) or a person or group of persons who promote any form of punishment that was used during the time we call WWII?
Put another way is it a German problem or a plague that can infect any part of Society at any moment?
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
I have a slightly different approach to those who commit hate crimes, and make
hateful statements that hurt those who are of other races, and religions.


Pick them up by the scruff of the neck and the seat of the pants, and we all count
one --two--three and 'hurl' them into the ocean.(far off-shore).
Our country doesn't want them.

Does that cover ALL races and ALL religions?
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
Mr. Tremain had a perfect right to appeal the HRC decision to courts, which I assume he didn’t do.

Appealing an HRC decision is as pointless as the Popes penis. All the HRC does is suck money out of people. Not sure if you've heard of the "ladies only" gym that's been dragged in front of these bozos because they won't let a man who "feels like a woman" join.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Appealing an HRC decision is as pointless as the Popes penis.

Cannuck, and why is it pointless? It is no more pointless than appealing a decision by the lower court. HRC is just a step before the courts, where two parties can see if they can settle their argument informally, without spending a lot of money (I understand court trials cost much more than HRC adjudications).

So sure you can appeal HRC decision, and I assume success rate for appeals would be comparable to the success rates of appeals against a lower court decision.

And just why is Pope’s penis pointless? Don’t you know the single most important qualification for a person to be a pope (or to become a Catholic Priest) is that he must possess a penis? No penis, no Pope.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Appealing an HRC decision is as pointless as the Popes penis.

Cannuck, and why is it pointless? It is no more pointless than appealing a decision by the lower court. HRC is just a step before the courts, where two parties can see if they can settle their argument informally, without spending a lot of money (I understand court trials cost much more than HRC adjudications).

So sure you can appeal HRC decision, and I assume success rate for appeals would be comparable to the success rates of appeals against a lower court decision.

And just why is Pope’s penis pointless? Don’t you know the single most important qualification for a person to be a pope (or to become a Catholic Priest) is that he must possess a penis? No penis, no Pope.

Now hear this:

The HRC, the government, the courts nor anybody else has any business in the heads of the nation!

In other words, thought and the expression of same MUST be kept free of government interference.

That is SO basic a principle and SO simple a concept, I'd think anyone could grasp it.

I guess not. And I am not just pissing on atheletic Sir Porter's leg (I am truely sorry, but I couldn't resist :)).........but on the leg of the Gov't of Canada, the HRC's themselves, and the courts.

Anybody watch Ezra Levant give 'em hell? Good going, but he should have done it without a lawyer.......why bother?