Far-right group leader faces contempt charge

[SirJosephPorter]

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.

Colpy, now that is a matter of opinion. I happen to think that in the rare, extreme case where an incendiary speech from an extremist is likely to lead to hatred, violence against a particular minority group, it should be actionable in the courts.

Anyway, if you don’t like it, fight to try to get the hate crimes law repealed. I doubt if you will succeed, there appears to be broad based support for it. The Conservatives (if anybody would repeal it, it would be the Conservatives) so far have shown no inclination to repeal the law or to get rid of HRC.

As long as we have the hate crime law, individuals will be prosecuted under it in rare instances. I see nothing wrong with that.

 

[Cannuck]

...without spending a lot of money...

If only that was the case.

 

[Just the Facts]

Maybe I'm just naively idealistic but I would have thought a "human rights" commission would be concerned with cases like "they didn't hire me because I'm short" not issues of expression. You know, issues where someone's rights were violated.

In my opinion these tribunals are not serving the purpose they were meant to serve and should be disbanded immediately.

 

[Zzarchov]

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).

Actually it costs the defendant a helluva lot more money. Its brutally expensive, added to the fact that you can charge someone for the some offense over and over again.

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.

Nope. HRC is a Kangaroo court. 100% conviction rate and they hold.

 

[Scott Free]

For once I agree with you Zzarchov.

 

[talloola]

Does that cover ALL races and ALL religions?

yes, just because we don't all believe in the same religions, or like me, don't believe
at all, doesn't mean that we shouldn't have respect and be fair to everyone.

We are all equal, all have the same right to be here, and make a good life for
ourselves, but we should not 'judge' others, just because we don't agree with them.

 

[MHz]

That seems to be an 'in theory' type of thing. In practice every member on this board falls short, bar none.
I'm not Muslim but I would view anybody who supports 'Islamaphobia' as being outside the belief that "all" are equal. If it is promoted by one specific group then that is the group that is the greater danger.
The same goes for calling Iran all sorts of negative names when she has not laid a finger on anyone. If the US has any issues with them having nuclear power those views should have been brought up when their application was first brought up rather than listening to them for the last, what, 6 years. When do they get told to STFU.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. One section of society does not get the right to brow-beat, condemned anybody they feel like for what they 'might do' (and then some 27 specific off the wall points), slander, lie about, etc. without being subject to the same in return.

Part of the right to disagree also means being able to express that view in a lawful manner, excluding threats of physical harm. Are mistakes supposed to be pointed out and then acted on in order to correct a wrong or does one 'lucky' section' get to point out all the errors they see but don't have to listen to any criticism on the way they act. So while Canadians might puff out their chests and proclaim to the world how grand and noble we are we do have our own baggage that says we are not always the kindest most gentle people around, each and every one of us can revert to extreme hatred in about as much time as it takes to flip a switch.

Now if there is something in those words you disagree with, by all means speak as long as you wish. The alternative is me trying to tell you your opinion doesn't matter so shush up. I'll even let you call me a few names but that is a short lived right that ends when I say it ends.

You can read as much or as little hidden meaning into that as you wish. While I may want it to be taken in the context given I'm well past the point of carrying if somebody wants to twist it to mean whatever they want it to mean.

 

[talloola]

doesn't matter if one disagrees or agrees with another's beliefs, it is not the point.

The point is that, all should be treated kindly, fairly and no hate language or action
should be thrown to anyone else.

 

[MHz]

doesn't matter if one disagrees or agrees with another's beliefs, it is not the point.

The point is that, all should be treated kindly, fairly and no hate language or action
should be thrown to anyone else.

I agree, 'all should be', in practice it is well short of that mark, without it being written down we wouldn't even know it was a goal it is so far from being real.

You might have better luck getting people used to insults so they laugh them off rather than the anger and such that they raise today. After several billion insults maybe people will just get bored of the whole thing.

 

[talloola]

I agree, 'all should be', in practice it is well short of that mark, without it being written down we wouldn't even know it was a goal it is so far from being real.

You might have better luck getting people used to insults so they laugh them off rather than the anger and such that they raise today. After several billion insults maybe people will just get bored of the whole thing.

Yeah, it would be much simpler to learn to ignore the insults, and leave it with
the insulter, it is all about them anyway, and really has nothing to do with
the insultee.

 

[MHz]

Has that ever been tried? The other method, stopping the insults before they are out doesn't seem to have worked, reaction to such is as old as time itself, practically.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I agree, 'all should be', in practice it is well short of that mark, without it being written down we wouldn't even know it was a goal it is so far from being real.

After several billion insults maybe people will just get bored of the whole thing.

Yes, MHZ, and you are just the right person to deliver several billion insults. After all, that will get you several billion brownie points with your God.

Anyway, to help you along (to get Brownie points with your God), let me give you a helping hand. On the other thread you promised a torrent of insults, a torrent of abuse if I repeated my claim that Bible prescribes death penalty to homosexuals. So let me reiterate that here.

Bible prescribes death penalty to homosexuals (in Leviticus). There, now let the insults pour out; let us see what you are capable of.

Make your God proud.

 

[MHz]

moved to SC don't reply here sjp

 

[SirJosephPorter]

moved to SC don't reply here sjp

Sorry, MHz, you don’t tell me where to reply and what to reply, you mot my god and I am not your Disciple (no doubt being a Fundamentalist, you are familiar with this language).

Anyway, where is the torrent of abuse, the torrent of filth, where are a billion insults? We are waiting.

 

[MHz]

Sorry, MHz, you don’t tell me where to reply and what to reply, you mot my god and I am not your Disciple (no doubt being a Fundamentalist, you are familiar with this language).

Anyway, where is the torrent of abuse, the torrent of filth, where are a billion insults? We are waiting.

Apparently it was so good (bad) the mods deleted it, guess you missed it and I didn't save a copy so it looks like you're up the creek.
Perhaps a mod could verify there was a deletion.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Apparently it was so good (bad) the mods deleted it, guess you missed it and I didn't save a copy so it looks like you're up the creek.
Perhaps a mod could verify there was a deletion.

So your torrent of abuse was too fruity for the moderators, eh? You want to try again? Here, let me help you.


MHz, CHRISTIAN GOD PRESCRIBES DEATH PENALTY FOR HOMOSEXUALS (LEVITICUS).

Well, have another go at it. Good luck.

 

[JLM]

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.”

Doesn't this contradict Freedom of Speech.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Doesn't this contradict Freedom of Speech.

I don’t know, JLM, if there is a court order against him, that means that he clearly violated the law of the land. If that is the case, then he must be punished.

If you don’t like the law, try to change the law. But saying that the court order contradicts somebody’s freedom of speech is nonsense. Usually the courts are quite zealous in guarding freedom of speech.

And if Mr. Tremain thinks that the law violates freedom of speech, let him launch a Charter challenge. But as long as the law exists, it must be followed.

 

[pgs]

Who cares ?