"It's not as though Canada is teeming with Holocaust Revisionists," one member of Ernst's legal team comforted me when I expressed some worry that the anticipated tightening of the "Hate Law" censorship thumb screws in the wings for truthsayers like Ernst Zundel might force things prematurely on several fronts. "This isn't about Ernst any more. They're gunning now for Christianity."
A "Wired News" article, written by Matt Friedman and dated today, shows nicely what is happening - to our not-so-covert glee.
Again, I quote some passages and proffer up my thoughts:
=====
Wired:
New plans by the Canadian government to crack down on hate crimes have civil libertarians up in arms. Even opponents of hate crimes are diving for cover.
Recommendations issued last week by the Federal, Provincial, and Territorial Working Group on Diversity, Equality, and Justice would broaden Canada's existing laws against hate crimes, making it illegal to possess material "for the purpose of distribution to promote hate."
The proposed amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada would also expand the law to apply to hate crimes based on age, gender, or mental disability. The reforms would prevent a criminal defendant in a hate-crime trial -- a neo-Nazi who denied that the Holocaust occurred, for example -- from claiming the freedom to disseminate material, including hate -crime propaganda, that a defendant believed to be true.
Zundelsite:
Mr. Friedman, all kinds of critters, big and small, here and absolutely everywhere, by the millions, all ". . . deny the Holocaust".
It's not just "Neo-Nazis." It never was, in fact.
Revisionism is a global movement of true-blue intellectuals refusing to be snowed by children's fairy tales that make no sense in science but illustrate the power of a Myth.
===
Wired:
Ujjal Dosanjh, attorney general of British Columbia and a strong proponent of the task force wanted to create new legislation "designed particularly to combat hate propaganda on the Internet."
The attorney general's office has campaigned for tougher laws since a highly publicized incident involving a racist Web site earned the town of Oliver, British Columbia, a reputation as the "hate capital of Canada."
Zundelsite:
Whatever happened to the argument that ". . . the internet is like a telephone"?
What did Klatt tell the Human Rights Commission in the last spirited Zundelsite round?
The Holocaust Enforcers need stronger censorship guns - is that it?
===
Wired:
Dosanjh said the incident demonstrated the need for stronger laws against hate propagandists.
"We need an offense that's easier to prove," Dosanjh said.
"This amendment will create that offense. Once you intend to promote hate -- that's where the line is drawn."
Zundelsite:
Did we hear right? You ***need an offense that is easy to prove"***? You ***need an amendment to create an offence***?
Most people would think the offence would have to be visible and recognizable before a law is needed, and not the other way around. Who was it that said that "hate crimes are so hard to prove because you cannot find them"?
The Mayor of Toronto looked and looked but couldn't find them on the Zundelsite, which we are not going to let her forget!
=====
Wired:
(Dosanjh's) reasoning doesn't sit well with civil libertarians, who warn that existing hate-crime statutes are the only laws on the books that permit prosecution for holding unpopular opinions.
Zundelsite:
These laws have been on the books for twenty years or so. Pernicious as they are, they did protect Ernst Zundel in the past, to the dismay of many. They do allow for Truth as a defense.
Please note, you cyber braves out there: It is a Human Rights Tribunal that's wrestling with the hoary Zundelsite. Two years ago, we begged for help, but it was quite okay to throw a "Neo-Nazi" to the wolves.
Did we not tell you it would get much worse? It's getting worse.
It will get much, much worse!
You could have stopped the circus that's called a "Human Rights Tribunal." You could still do it now if you were so inclined.
=====
Wired:
"The government is going in the wrong direction," said Alan Borovoy, general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. "It should be repealing, or at least narrowing, the anti-hate legislation. It's already too broad an enactment."
Zundelsite:
In defense of Alan Borovoy, a Jew, it should be said that in the 1984 Great Holocaust Trial, he did come out - of sorts - and spoke up for Ernst Zundel. He also did so, to his credit, at the expensive postal hearing. He could do something now.
=====
Wired:
The proposals continue a trend of eroding Canadian civil liberties, Borovoy said. "Ever since the government embarked on a course of trying to outlaw expressions of hatred, it's shown that there is a slippery slope. One thing has led to another."
Zundelsite:
Ernst Zundel might have spoken.
=====
Wired:
Electronic Frontier Canada, an information-rights advocacy group, agreed. "The proposals reflect the fears in certain constituencies represented by some of the participants in the working group," said the group's vice president, Richard Rosenberg. "There seems to be a notion that you can curtail free speech and society will somehow be better for it."
Zundelsite:
Zundel attorneys approached Electronic Frontier Canada and asked for assistance. We are still asking for assistance. We are already waiting with bated breath and with blue ribbons in our fists - instead of swastikas.
=====
Wired:
The Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) has praised the reforms, however.
Zundelsite:
Aha! Surprise - surprise! Who flushed that bunch of self-appointed censors out, pray tell? It wasn't EFF.
=====
Wired:
"The law isn't final, but with the wide-ranging approval we've gotten, it's pretty close," said Bernie Farber, the CJC's national director of community relations. "We have a concern that the Net needs some manner of legislation to ensure that it's not used by hatemongers to promote hate."
Zundelsite:
Would Bernie please direct his concern to cyber places such as the Jewish Defense League Website? I haven't visited - and won't! - but was it not the JDL that advocated killing David Cole for his Revisionism?
=====
Wired:
Ken McVay, who as president of the Nizkor Project, is one of Canada's most prominent opponents to racism, has a more immediate concern. Nizkor maintains one of the world's largest online archives of anti-Semitic material, which is used to fight ignorance and expose extremism.
Zundelsite:
Ken McVay has reason to worry about the new proposed law. He claims on his website that Nazis used to tickle homosexuals to death. Would that not qualify as ". . . trivializing the Holocaust"?
=====
Wired:
"There are neo-Nazis who point to URLs on Nizkor," McVaysaid. "That's probably the clearest example of how stupid this is. Is it 'possession with intent' if the propaganda resides on my servers and some neo-Nazi makes a link to it?"
Zundelsite:
Right. Please applaud. And was it not Sol Litman of the Canadian Simon Wiesenthal Center who complained in a letter to B'nai Brith that Ken McVay of Nizkor had ". . . just about outlived his usefulness" to Jews?
Nizkor has been a blessing to the Zundelsite - and, we point out, vice versa!
=====
Wired:
Elissa Leiff, senior counsel in the Department of Justice's Criminal Law Policy Section, dismissed any suggestion that activists like McVay might be burned by the new laws, citing the proposed law's requirement of an "intent to promote hate."
Zundelsite:
Hear, hear! Nizkor and the Zundelsite have a great deal of identical content - but, hey, sooth sayers to the fore to decide who is the villain with "intent"!
=====
Wired:
"It's so hypocritical," McVay replied. "If an idea is so dangerous in and of itself that you have to legislate against it, then the whole question of intent is irrelevant. If it's dangerous it's dangerous whether it's on my site or [white supremacist] Tom Metzger's."
Zundelsite:
Well, Ken McVay? Why, then, run around giving seminars on the dangers of "hate" on the Net for policemen?
=====
Wired:
For supporters of the proposals, however, the possession offense is just a logical extension of the hate laws already on the books.
"We should be dealing with the most extreme cases, and I'm not sure these proposals differ from existing laws in that respect," Farber said. "It remains to be seen how these proposals will be translated into the language of law, though. There are some areas that have to be clarified when the law is developed."
Zundelsite:
The law is like a rubber band? It can be stretched when needed?"
=====
Wired:
Leiff said it's up to the Department of Justice to phrase the amendments in such a way that they don't violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and to present them to Parliament for debate. She said that was likely to happen sometime next year, and that she had little doubt that the amendments will become law.
"It's fairly well thought-out to date, and it has the support of all the attorneys general," Leiff said. "I'm sure the legislation will pass."
Zundelsite:
It ***will*** pass if Canada rolls over and plays dead.
If that should happen - and it might, what with all the hysteria about the Evil Neo-Nazi on Carlton Street - Zero Tolerance will be the rule.
Next time a cyber brave - who thinks he can ignore the struggle to shut down the Zundelsite - deplains in Canada, he'll see the following:
"Attention international visitors: Freedom does not include the right to be free. Private hatred is not private. Visitors are advised to wear a happy-face in public. Frowns may be interpreted and confiscated."
(With partial credits to Slade Farney)
Ingrid
Thought for the Day:
"Do they have ANY CLUE how stupid they sound? and how much of a joke Canada is becoming (has become) in the online community?"
- Lizardus -