Comments on: Hate speech law unconstitutional: rights tribunal

By: MaryT

MaryT — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:27:26 +0000

There has already been a beating death of a young native boy, by two 16 yr olds.
And a young man stopped another beating death of a 14 month old baby.
And those took place before this ruling.

By: beentheredonethat

beentheredonethat — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:39:19 +0000

I knew exactly what you meant….not to worry. I don’t know how to add one of those little yellow heads smiling and winking……so this will have to do..’click’.

By: Cynapse

Cynapse — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:31:10 +0000

Heh! No I meant not securing your network is silly business. Not only can lazy neighbours steal your connection, but pervs have been known to drive around with their laptops looking for open connections to download their illicit goods. The woman’s almost lucky Warman exploited her first, as he’ll be taken to task for it.

By: beentheredonethat

beentheredonethat — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:23:30 +0000

True, it was her fault

Now I know damn well that you of all people didn’t mean that the way it sounded and because of that I chuckled…..sitting here all alone thinking up excuses not to clean up the house before the ‘real boss’ gets home from her business trip this evening. Here’s a chuckle back at ya. I’ve been retired for just over 7 years, ‘she’ has to work another probably 15 yrs. Ha….her bad for being born so late. Now where’d I leave the vacuum last month? LOL

By: Cynapse

Cynapse — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 18:54:49 +0000

btdt – Canada is not awash in such behaviour at the moment but we don’t know whether that’s due to a fear of the HRC. Now that its capacity has been severely diminshed, we’ll be able to see whether “hate speech” is in fact epidemic in Canada. No one can predict the future, though so far we know that the strongest proponents of free speech had no problem lionizing former Heritage Front leader Marc Lemire as some kind of Canadian hero – completely unaffected by his associations and the content of his message. One can infer that the type of speech these proponents plan to engage in won’t be simple criticism of the government or something else in the original spirit of freedom of speech (since that type of speech was never under HRC fire)

The only thing Warman did that seemed abhorrent was stealing internet from that woman who didn’t secure her network properly. True, it was her fault, but Warman could have easily gotten her hurt or killed if he said the wrong thing to the wrong person using her IP address. Extremists DO track access to their websites.

By: beentheredonethat

beentheredonethat — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 18:04:13 +0000

Cynapse, you’re making it sound like Canada is awash in hate speech. I would suggest exactly the opposite in fact. Were we witnessing regular either individual or collective Kristallnacht or much lesser such events here in Canada the law would certainly be focusing more resources to address the problem. The fact of the matter is some people’s perception is not the Justice Department’s reality. I have absolutely no doubt that Canadian police are prosecuting hate crimes when they find them if they have the evidence to do so. The Department of Justice will not prosecute any crime if they do not believe at the outset that they have a reasonable chance of obtaining a conviction. The main reasons, well not enough evidence to convict could (horrors) mean that the suspect is innocent! Now that’s a novel assumption. Second, the personal cost both emotionally and financially a false trial would inflict on an possibly innocent person and lastly the unecessaary cost to the taxpayers. The HRC’s, under the firm belief that a mere lack of evidence was no reason not to prosecute somebody and subject them to emotional and financial hell implimented their own rules. They even set it up so that any requirement for ‘real’ evidence was a moot point. Most law abiding and freedom loving people would be aghast if their criminal courts boasted a 100% conviction rate. I can’t believe some people out there find the HRC’s 100% conviction rate and the dispicable methods they undertook to ensure that fact reassuring let alone a positive sign that Canadian’s freedoms are protected.

By: Cynapse

Cynapse — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:18:37 +0000

Luft, you are the king of drivel, so your accusations mean little. In this bile-riddled Luft cameo, you claim that nothing else is needed because there is “hate speech” on the books. What are the chances of it actually going to court, Luft? Is our court system so efficient that we run out of murder and assault crimes and thus have plenty of time to prosecute non-violent, low-profile crimes of speech?

You know this is not the case, which can only lead one to believe that you want the government to be toothless in combating hate. What remains to be known is why.

It’s always interesting how “freedom” boils down to the carte blanche to stockpile guns and spread hate. You really have to wonder what’s on the minds of these self-proclaimed patriots. It’s even more interesting you’d consider my a candidate for a nazi court, given who your folk hero was for this HRC ordeal.

By: John Luft

John Luft — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:11:03 +0000

As usual, Cynapse spews drivel and opinion around as if it were fact. The truth is that there are already provisions in the Criminal Code for “hate speech”. Nothing more is needed. Cynapse, you would have been a great candidate for the Volksgerichtshof.

By: Frappeur

Frappeur — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 11:44:17 +0000

Mr. Cynapse, you are correct to say that some nut case may be led to beat and even murder someone after being influenced by some hateful web site.

The problem is not with the hateful speech which can be countered by logical argument but what happens to the person committing what is a criminal act.

Many people are opposed to abortion. I am sure all of them are equally opposed to the murder of abortionists. The legal system must deal severely with those who contravene the law by their actions.

There have been cases where homosexuals have been beaten up because of their sexual orientation. While some may object to the homosexual lifestyle and may say so there is no excuse for a criminal act. These criminals need to be put away from society for a long time.

I do not know the details of the events in Rwanda. I certainly hope those who committed the murders will be dealt with although from the little I have heard the legal system is not working very well. Maybe that is what should be looked into.

Most of the attempts to silence people over the world have been done by governments and even individuals who do not want to be criticized for hideous activities (I think of China using Falun Gong people as a source of spare body parts). . I think it is better to let the creepy individuals in their tin-foil hats have their say so the concerned people covering important causes can continue to speak out.

By: Cynapse

Cynapse — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 04:22:26 +0000

and at the expense of people who simply dare to be who they are. I didn’t know giving Marc Lemire carte blanche was worth any kind of expense but maybe I’m biased since folks like me “need killing” in his mind.

Given what’s appeared on some BT blogs while under the tyranny of the HRC, it’ll be interesting to see what comes up now and how we as a country will evolve. I have an idea, but don’t want to spoil the surprise

BTW, does this mean we’ll no longer be denying national entry to controversial Muslim scholars?

Again, these freedom-fighters will be taken seriously when they support NAMBLA or some other odious cause that DOESN’T fit into their agenda – otherwise this was just a power grab.

By: Pat

Pat — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 04:14:18 +0000

Yep, I’ve got to agree with you Cynapse, being able to speak your mind will probably result in a person being beat to death.. but on the other side of the coin there is the reality that A: The person needed killing B: There will be many people saved from a hideous reality by virtue of the fact that this information freely flows. There will probably also be someone killed because of their sports team affiliation too. What to do?

There’s always a price paid for freedom, usually at the expense of those who would wish to deny it.