Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old March 25th, 2008 #1
J3115
Senior Member
 
J3115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,977
Default How to turn a neo-Nazi into a free-speech martyr

How to turn a neo-Nazi into a free-speech martyr

Jonathan Kay, National Post
Published: Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Neo-Nazis at the Alberta legislature in 1997.
Brian Gavriloff, CanWest News Service
http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465...n?size=404x272



Marc Lemire is a former leader of Canada's neo-Nazi Heritage Front. He helped
distribute flyers informing Canadians that "Immigration can kill you." On the
internet he acts as webmaster for a variety of anti-Semitic organizations.

In short, he is a bigot -- a poster-boy for all those who claim that racism is
still alive and well in modern Canada.

But when Lemire faces off against representatives of the Canadian Human Rights
Commission (HRC) later today, I will be rooting for him -- and so will
thousands of other Canadians who are otherwise contemptuous of Lemire's way of
thinking. It may seem impossible that decent, ordinary people could be
convinced to take the side of an alleged neo-Nazi. Yet, somehow, Canada's
"human rights" establishment has managed the task.

There is only one way to get people to support a despised outcast such as
Lemire -- and that is to turn him into a martyr for a larger principle -- in
this case, the principle that Canadians should be able to express themselves
without subjecting their opinions to the judgment of heresy-sniffing
bureaucrats. At today's hearing, Lemire will be interrogating two HRC
employees who are investigating whether he violated Section 13.1 of the Human
Rights Act, which prohibits Canadians from electronically communicating "any
matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by
reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the
basis of [their group identity]." As Canadian Civil Liberties Association
general-counsel Alan Borovoy told National Post reporter Joseph Brean, Section
13.1 could theoretically be used to censor a book detailing widespread German
complicity in the Holocaust, since such a book would be "likely to expose"
Germans to hatred.

Some modest limitations on free speech can be tolerated in a free society --
libel laws, for instance, or prohibitions on speech that would actually incite
imminent, lawless action. But ideological litmus tests such as Section 13.1
are never acceptable. Whether directed at "traitors," blasphemers, pacifists,
communists, racists or otherwise, history shows, these tests always mushroom
into full-scale censorship campaigns against enemies of the government or of
its orthodoxies. The cases against Maclean's and The Western Standard were
entirely predictable manifestations of this fundamental rule.

You'd think that human rights types would understand the power of empathy. A
short while back, I attended a Toronto awards dinner for something called the
Canadian Centre for Diversity. Out in the lobby, the organizers unfurled some
of their latest public service announcements. In one, a black man intones: "I
am a woman when I am confronting inequality." In another, a Chinese man says
"I am a Jew when I am learning about the Holocaust." An able-bodied woman says
"I am a person with special needs when I am realizing how inaccessible our
world is." As Lemire goes up against the HRC, a similar set of aphorisms
suggest themselves: "When the law bans obscenity, I am a pornographer. When a
fatwa bans blasphemy, I am an infidel. And when a human rights commission
prosecutes internet hatemongers for hate speech, I am a neo-Nazi scumbag." If
Lemire and his ilk have a secret scheme to render neo-Nazis into sympathetic
figures, they could conceive no better weapon than Section 13.1.

< 12>
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/...?id=397652&p=2



2008 Canwest Interactive, a division of Canwest Publishing Inc.
 
Old March 26th, 2008 #2
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Default

About as solid an argument as we're likely to see in the controlled media, given our debased and jewed society.

Gee, basic rights to free speech. Guess the writer, Jonathan Kay, isn't a jew. Free speech never seems basic or "a given" to jews; their entire genetic mental structure favors racial totalitarianism. That which doesn't serve their race - simply should not exist. That's their mindset. They get ... uncomfortable... when White men meet up and talk plainly and freely. Lots of "bad" could come from that, y'know. Dangerous.

A handicapped lesbian might be offended somewhere. No, that's not the real reason for speech restriction. The real reason is "to prevent" another HOOOOOLOCAUST. Gag the goyim! That'll keep our victims from hating us!

Last edited by Sean Gruber; March 26th, 2008 at 12:06 AM. Reason: changed sentence
 
Old March 26th, 2008 #3
brutus
Senior Member
 
brutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: naples
Posts: 11,123
Default

Why don't they find out exactly who drafted and pushed implementation of Section 13.1 into the Canadian justice system and then make them very sorry that they did it.

Warman needs to be addressed as well.

.
__________________
The ink of the learned is as precious as the blood of the martyr. For one drop of ink may make millions think.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:39 AM.
Page generated in 0.29675 seconds.