Thursday, November 24, 2011

Catholic Civil Rights League: Dump censorship of Section 13

 

CCRL urges support for Bill C-304

 

OTTAWA, On November 23, 2011 – The Catholic Civil Rights League encourages all MPs to support Bill C-304, “An Act to Amend the Human Rights Act”, which was read and debated last night in the House of Commons. The private member’s bill, introduced in September by MP Brian Storseth (CPC-Westlock-St. Paul), seeks to repeal Section 13 of the federal Human Rights Code banning hate speech over the Internet.

Because Section 13 has been used to penalize the peaceable expression of opinion based on religious belief, the League has a long record of support for efforts to rescind or significantly rewrite it to protect religious freedom. The League was pleased to learn that Justice Minister Rob Nicholson expressed support for Bill C-304 during parliamentary debate.

“Given that freedom of speech and freedom of religion are guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the League believes that provisions in the Criminal Code provide the most effective way to address harm that may arise from public expression,” says Joanne McGarry, League executive director. “Among other things, courts provide a more level playing field for the complainant and the accused. Human rights tribunals were designed to address complaints of discrimination in the workplace and the provision of goods and services; decisions that could involve the limitation of a Charter right should be left to the courts.”

The League is encouraging its members to express support for Bill C-304 to their MPs.

- Saskatchewan hate speech provision must be struck, says League, August 11, 2011
- Review of Section 13 greatly needed, says League. February 13, 2009

About CCRL
 
Catholic Civil Rights League (www.ccrl.ca) assists in creating conditions within which Catholic teachings can be better understood, cooperates with other organizations in defending civil rights in Canada, and opposes defamation and discrimination against Catholics on the basis of their beliefs. CCRL was founded in 1985 as an independent lay organization and has chapters across Canada. The Catholic Civil Rights League is a Canadian non-profit organization entirely supported by the generosity of its members.

For further information:
Joanne McGarry, Executive Director, 416-466-8244; joanne.mcgarry@ccrl.ca

 

 

From: http://www.ccrl.ca/index.php?id=5231

 

 

CATHOLIC REGISTER: Toss Section 13 !

Toss Section 13

Written by Catholic Register Editorial

Tuesday, 22 November 2011 15:12

 

Bills introduced from the backbenches of Parliament are typically cast adrift unless the government opts to throw them a life preserver. So we applaud Justice Minister Rob Nicholson for tossing a lifeline to a private member’s bill that seeks repeal of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Section 13 comprises the paragraphs of an otherwise worthwhile act that makes hate speech a punishable offence. Hateful language, however transmitted, is abhorrent and society has an obligation to combat it robustly. But Section 13, which evolved from legislation in the 1960s to silence racist telephone hotlines, is manifestly flawed and its repeal is long overdue.

Thus Bill C-304, introduced by Tory backbencher Brian Storseth last month, has won the support of the government and now seems almost certain to proceed eventually to a final vote in Parliament next year. The Conservatives voted almost unanimously to scrap Section 13 at a 2008 policy convention. So Storseth’s bill appears a safe bet to pass under the Tory majority.

“Our government believes that Section 13 is not an appropriate or effective means for combatting hate propaganda,” Nicholson told Parliament. “We believe the Criminal Code is the best vehicle to prosecute these crimes.”

The purpose of the Canadian Human Rights Act is to safeguard human rights but Section 13, expanded in 2001 to include the Internet, grossly infringes on the basic right of free expression. The enforcement of Section 13 by tribunals is subjective and based on arbitrary definitions of hate speech. It can be wielded like a club to punish and muzzle any person or organization, including faith groups, whose message is deemed discriminatory by any individual who wants to file a complaint.

Speech promoting hatred or inciting violence is rightly classified as a criminal offence. But expressing opinions, however objectionable, that merely offend another person should not be unlawful in a free society. As constitutional lawyer Iain Benson argues, Section 13 fails to make that distinction between real hate speech and “hurt” speech.

Three years ago, constitutional expert Professor Richard Moon was asked by the Canadian Human Rights Commission to study Section 13. He concluded that it was tantamount to censorship and recommended its repeal. The next year, a human rights tribunal ruled that Section 13 violated the Charter right of free expression, a decision that will be reviewed next month in federal court.

Storseth’s bill pre-empts that court hearing and places the matter in Parliament, where it belongs. Laws should be made in Parliament where they can be transparently enacted by elected officials, not arbitrarily decided in courts by unelected judges.

Unfortunately, a minority parliament failed to act following Moon’s 2008 report, but Storseth’s bill is providing an overdue opportunity to finally make things right.

 

Article from: http://www.catholicregister.org/columns/item/13390-toss-section-13

 

 

 

 

Monday, November 21, 2011

PEN Canada endorses Conservative MP's bill to repeal section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act

PEN Canada endorses Conservative MP's bill to repeal section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act

TORONTO, Nov. 21, 2011 /CNW/ - PEN Canada today announced its support for Conservative MP Brian Storseth's private member's bill calling for the repeal of section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) which deals with hate speech.

"The best defense against so-called 'hate speech' is not government enforcement of vague prohibitions, but an educated and alert citizenry and vigilant and responsible media," said Charles Foran, President of PEN Canada.

This is not the first call for the repeal of Section 13, which makes it a discriminatory practice to communicate by telecommunication, including the internet, "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 a prohibited ground of discrimination." 

In 2008, the Canadian Human Rights Commission hired constitutional law expert Professor Richard Moon of the University of Windsor to examine section 13. He recommended that it be repealed, a recommendation that was never acted on. In his report, Professor Moon wrote: "We must develop ways other than censorship to respond to expression that stereotypes and defames the members of an identifiable group and to hold institutions such as the media accountable when they engage in these forms of discriminatory expression."

"The right of free expression is guaranteed as a "fundamental freedom" by subsection 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" said Philip Slayton, Chair of PEN Canada's National Affairs Committee, "section 13 of the CHRA is inconsistent with the right of free expression in Canada and is wrong in principle."

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, established by the CHRA, has wide powers if it substantiates a discriminatory practice, including ordering the person responsible for the practice to compensate the victim and pay a penalty of up to $10,000.

PEN Canada is an organization of writers and others that defends freedom of expression both at home and abroad.

For further information:

Brendan de Caires: 416 703 8448 ext 21 | bdecaires@pencanada.ca

 

SOURCE: http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/881669/pen-canada-endorses-conservative-mp-s-bill-to-repeal-section-13-of-the-canadian-human-rights-act

 

 

 

 

 

LEVANT: No More Witch Hunts

No more witch hunts

Persecuted sure to win reprieve from ridiculous, costly hate laws

 

By Ezra Levant ,QMI Agency

 

For 34 years, Canada has had a disgraceful censorship law that violates our human rights.

In 1977, Pierre Trudeau rammed through the Canadian Human Rights Act — an Orwellian name for a law that actually destroys real rights.

The entire law is a corruption of justice — it creates a kangaroo court, run by non-judges, that does not follow the same rules and procedures of real courts, but has massive powers to punish and fine people who aren’t politically correct.

But the worst part of the law is Section 13, the censorship provision. Section 13 creates a word crime — the crime of publishing or broadcasting anything that can cause hurt feelings.

Back in 1977, that law was focused on telephone lines and answering machines. But 10 years ago, it was expanded to include the Internet.

So it even covers things like whatever you post to your Facebook page. Section 13 says “it is a discriminatory practice ... to cause to be ... communicated ... any matter that is likely to expose a person ... to hatred or contempt.”

So if you publish anything on Facebook, or on your cellphone voice message, that might make one person feel bad about another, you’ve just broken the law.

Truth is not a defence to being charged with “hate” under Section 13. Fair comment is not a defence. Religious belief is not a defence. Telling a joke is not a defence. The law has nothing to do with truth or the right to have an opinion. It’s about whether or not you’ve offended someone or hurt their feelings.

Section 13 is an insane law. So un-Canadian, so contrary to our traditions of liberty that go back centuries, inherited from the United Kingdom.

It’s no surprise that this law had a 100% conviction rate in Canada for the first three decades of its existence. This federal law was copied by provincial legislatures. B.C., Alberta and Saskatchewan all have censorship provisions, too.

Last week, the federal justice minister, Rob Nicholson, stood up in the House of Commons and answered a question about Section 13.

The question was about a private member’s bill, put by Brian Storseth, an MP from northern Alberta. Storseth has introduced a private member’s bill, C-304, to repeal Section 13. But private member’s bills have little chance of passing without the endorsement of the government.

But Nicholson did endorse it. He called on all MPs to support it, too. Bill C-304, Storseth’s bill, is now effectively a government bill. And with a Tory majority in both the House and Senate, this bill is as good as done.

No more witch hunts by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. No more persecuting their political and religious enemies.

This is the best thing the Harper government has done in five years. Freedom is on the march.

READ THE FULL STORY AT: http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/18/no-more-witch-hunts

 

 

Friday, November 18, 2011

SUN NEWS: Hate speech law on the chopping block

Hate speech law on the chopping block

By Kris Sims ,Parliamentary Bureau

First posted:

OTTAWA -  Canada's human rights commissions could soon be de-fanged.

New legislation would repeal Section 13, the hate speech portion of Human Rights Act.

“Our government believes Section 13 is not an appropriate or effective means for combating hate propaganda. We believe the Criminal Code is the best vehicle to prosecute these crimes,” Justice Minister Rob Nicholson told the House of Commons during question period.

“I say to the opposition: get onside with the media, MacLean's magazine, National Post, and even the Toronto Star says this section should go.”

Quebecor and its media properties, including Sun News Network and QMI Agency, also want the section scrapped.

Tory backbencher Brian Storseth drafted the private member's bill, C-304.

“This is a great first step,” Storseth told The Source host Ezra Levant on Sun News Network. “Free speech is something we all hold very dear to our hearts and something we all have a necessity for.”

“The entire Canadian Human Rights Act ought to be repealed. It's worse than just useless,” said Levant. “You don't even have to cause hurt feelings — just to have published something likely to cause hurt feelings. What an insane law, so un-Canadian, so contrary to our traditions of liberty that go back centuries, inherited from the United Kingdom,.”

With a Conservative majority in the House and the Senate, the bill will likely become law quickly, after 32 years accusations and convictions over allegations of hate speech.

“No more witch hunts by the Canadian Human Rights Commission, no more persecuting their political enemies, said Levant.

FULL STORY AT: http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/17/hate-speech-law-on-the-chopping-block

 

 

Thursday, November 17, 2011

BREAKING: Over 20 Conservative MPs come out to support the Repeal of Section 13

BREAKING: Over 20 Conservative MPs come out to support the Repeal of Section 13

 

 

 

Back on September 30th, 2011 Conservative MP Brian Storseth (Westlock—St. Paul) introduced Private Members Bill C-304An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act (protecting freedom)”.  This bill would repeal the notorious Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act and strip the censorship powers from the fanatical Canadian Human Rights Commission and remove their ability to censor content on the Internet. At the time Mr. Storseth introduced his bill; he received a very warm welcome from freedom lovers all over Canada and also received very supportive editorials in the mainstream media. (here), (here), (here), (here), (here).  Even Calgary’s Catholic Bishop came out to support the bill.

 

Unfortunately Bill C-304 is not a government bill, so it has a limited chance to even pass. According to the Parliament of Canada Website, since 1910 only 235 private members bills have ever passed. (789 private members’ bills were introduced during the last Parliament alone, and only four received Royal Assent).  But this private members bill is a bit different!  Earlier today, Bill C-304 was to receive second reading before the House of Commons in Ottawa.  It appears to have been bumped from today’s agenda due to the jobs Act, but as part of the introduction of the private members bill, a list of “seconders” (supporters) was attached to Bill C-304. The “seconders” are Members of Parliament who have read the act and publically declared their support for it.  Such a lengthy list of seconders is literally unheard of for a private members bill.

 

Private member’s Bill C-304 has the announced support of:

 

  • Mr. Lemieux (Glengarry—Prescott—Russell)
  • Mr. Sorenson (Crowfoot),
  • Mr. Toet (Elmwood—Transcona),
  • Mr. Shipley (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex),
  • Mr. Clarke (Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River)
  • Mr. Miller (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound)
  • Mr. Richards (Wild Rose),  (…more)
  • Mr. Trost (Saskatoon—Humboldt),
  • Mr. Bruinooge (Winnipeg South),
  • Mr. Lunney (Nanaimo—Alberni)
  • Mr. Calkins (Wetaskiwin)
  • Mr. Chisu (Pickering—Scarborough East),  (…more)
  • Mrs. Smith (Kildonan—St. Paul),
  • Mr. Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake),
  • Mr. Payne (Medicine Hat)
  • Mr. Hiebert (South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale)
  • Mr. Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings)
  • Mr. Breitkreuz (Yorkton—Melville)
  • Mr. Tweed (Brandon—Souris)
  • Mr. Sweet (Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale)

 

(The Journals Branch of the House of Commons limits the number of seconders for a bill to 20 members .. so dozens more may support this Bill, but are not listed)

 

 

Conservative MPs from coast to coast are lining up to support the repeal of radical censorship by the “Human Rights” Commission using Section 13.  With so many Conservative MPs speaking out for freedom, and the base of the Conservative Party overwhelmingly supporting the repeal of Section 13, why is the Prime Minister Stephen Harper not taking on Bill C-304 and making it a government bill?

 

While Harper might be speaking out, his MPs certainly are. Wild Rose MP Blake Richards issued a great press release on November 11, 2011 where he denounced Section 13 and it’s danger to freedom of expression.  He wrote that: “A section of Trudeau-era legislation that purports to defend human rights but which actually undermines one of those basic liberties – the freedom of expression I support the bill by my Conservative colleague Brian Storseth, the M.P. for Westlock-St. Paul, to repeal Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Section 13 is as flawed as it is subjective on the very issue of hate that it claims to combat, and it needs to go.” 

 

Richards continues: “Section 13 subjects citizens’ Charter freedoms of thought, belief, opinion and expression to the whims of those who want to suppress ideas they disagree with or find personally distasteful or offensive, but which do not necessarily constitute hate. The Supreme Court of Canada has indicated that Section 13 does not target expression that some may find offensive, but that hasn’t stopped Human Rights tribunals from accepting aggrieved persons’ sense of being offended as a basis for convictions.

 

Conservative MP Blake Richards sums up his press release with “Section 13 of the CHRA needs to be done away with and I will be voting in favour of repeal

 

Bravo to Richards and to the other Members of Parliament who are standing up for freedom and seeking to dismantle the tyranny of censorship, which Section 13 enforces.

 

 

-Marc Lemire

November 16, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


I need your help for the Appeal!

Fighting the fanatics at the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission and defending freedom of speech for ALL Canadians is not an easy task. In particular, the Federal Court of Canada challenge to defeat Canada’s internet censorship legislation, has consumed an immense amount of time and resources. This has meant sacrificing a lot of cherished things in my life that I used to take for granted such as spending precious time with my wonderful children. It's also very costly and has incurred heavy debts given that I'm facing a "Human Rights" juggernaut that has a limitless budget. It has already spent millions and is prepared to spend a lot more of your tax dollars to keep their thought control machine running.

 My courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka and myself have demonstrated what two dedicated researchers can accomplish against overwhelming odds. We have single-handedly and doggedly fought the system and exposed the corrupt underbelly of the "Human Rights" Commission's fanatics. Nothing ever comes easy when you are fighting such a racket. This case is a seminal one, where the outcome will have serious implications on our right to think and speak freely in this country for generations to come. All Canadians will benefit if we manage to get this shameful law expunged from our legal books.

 Every victory we've attained against the "Human Rights" juggernaut has come at great expense. Nothing has come easy.  In fact, the “Human Rights” Commission has done everything in their power to stop exposure of their twisted censorship agenda.

 I cannot carry on this important fight alone. Your donations literally equal the survival of this case. I wish to thank all those that have donated to this worthy cause. Please donate directly to us so that I can send out a personal thank you. If you have donated to another organization or individual please contact me so I can thank you directly and send you a copy of our special booklet that is for our supporters only.

Donate using a credit card online with PayPal

 

 

      

http://www.StopSection13.com | http://www.freedomsite.org | http://blog.freedomsite.org | http://canadianhumanrightscommission.blogspot.com

 

 

 

 

 

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Wild Rose MP Blake Richards Press Release: FLAWED 'SECTION 13' A DANGER TO EXPRESSION AND HAS TO GO

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NOVEMBER 11, 2011

 

FLAWED ‘SECTION 13’ A DANGER TO EXPRESSION AND HAS TO GO

 

A section of Trudeau-era legislation that purports to defend human rights but which actually undermines one of those basic liberties – the freedom of expression – could be repealed under a Private Member’s Bill that’s now before Parliament.

 

I support the bill by my Conservative colleague Brian Storseth, the M.P. for Westlock-St. Paul, to repeal Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Section 13 is as flawed as it is subjective on the very issue of hate that it claims to combat, and it needs to go.

 

Originally conceived in response to a spate of recorded hate messages that circulated in Toronto, Section 13 has since been identified by many experts – including the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) itself – as problematic on several fronts.

 

For one thing, it targets the dissemination of hate messages without ever clearly defining what constitutes hatred or contempt. It considers acts of hate or contempt as “any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt”. That is so vague that it would be laughable if not for the fact that it carries real consequences.

 

Section 13 subjects citizens’ Charter freedoms of thought, belief, opinion and expression to the whims of those who want to suppress ideas they disagree with or find personally distasteful or offensive, but which do not necessarily constitute hate. The Supreme Court of Canada has indicated that Section 13 does not target expression that some may find offensive, but that hasn’t stopped Human Rights tribunals from accepting aggrieved persons’ sense of being offended as a basis for convictions.

 

Hate speech is already prohibited under the Criminal Code of Canada. And a court of law is where such matters should be tried. In a courtroom, rules of procedure, the defence of truth, and evidence of intent or willfulness on the part of the accused apply. But no such provisions are afforded the accused in the quasi-judicial process set out by Human Rights Tribunals, where Section 13 cases most often land.

 

It is widely acknowledged that Section 13 conflicts with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ guarantees to freedoms of expression and beliefs.

 

An independent review of the CRHC in 2008 called for the repealing of Section 13. The CRHC itself, in a September 2009 ruling, was forced to find the Section 13 hate speech provision unconstitutional.

 

For all of these reasons, Section 13 of the CHRA needs to be done away with and I will be voting in favour of repeal

 

For more information, please contact Blake Richards, M.P., at (403) 948-5103

http://www.blakerichards.ca/documents/Wild%20Rose%20Report%20-%20CRHC%20Section%2013%20-%2011122011.pdf

 

---- COCHRANE EAGLE ARTICLE ----

Richards wants to scrap section on hate speech

November 16, 2011
By: Lindsay Seewalt

 

 

Wild Rose MP Blake Richards, is voting in favour of the repeal of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).

Dating back to the Trudeau era, this section was implemented to defend human rights from hate speech. According to Richards, the legislation in fact undermines the basic liberty of freedom of expression due to its vague definition.

“For one thing, it targets dissemination of hate messages without ever clearly defining what constitutes hatred or contempt,” said Richards in a press release.

“It considers acts of hate or contempt as ‘any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt’. That is so vague that it would be laughable if not for the fact that it carries real consequences.”

Richards continues on to explain that Section 13 subjects citizen’s Charter rights to those individuals who wish to suppress ideas they may find distasteful, but do not actually constitute hate.

Hate speech is already prohibited by the Criminal Code of Canada and it has been widely acknowledged that Section 13 is in conflict with the guarantee of the freedoms of expression and beliefs under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The repeal of Section 13 was the result of an independent review of the CHRC in 2008 and the CHRC found the hate speech provision unconstitutional based on a ruling in September 2009.

The Wild Rose MP is in favour of the popular consensus that Section 13 is dated, vague in definition and needs to be removed from the CHRC according to his Nov. 11 Wild Rose Report.

 

See full story at: http://www.cochraneeagle.com/2011/11/richards-wants-to-scrap-section-on-hate-speech/

 

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

The NDP gets it all wrong on Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act

Here is a letter from Hamilton area NDP MP on Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act – Canada’s censorship legislation.

 

On one hand, it is good to see that even the NDP has “specific concerns regarding the [Canadian Human Rights] Commission” but it is unfortunate that the NDP is so far off they think that the CHRC is about “understanding and eliminating hatred and racism in our country.”  Sadly, many NDP Members of Parliament have not opened their eyes and looked at how corrupt the CHRC have become. [I did try to enlighten them]

 

Here is a small example:

 

The CHRC is not about eliminating hate or racism at all … they are only concerned with attacking a certain group of Canadians – whom THEY hate.  For friends of the CHRC, they are free to put as much hate material on the internet as they like.  The CHRC will cover it up, protect and dismiss any complaints against them.  But if you’re on the CHRC enemies list, watch out.  The Immigrant Poem will get you hauled before an EIGHT year hearing.

 

HERE ARE THE FACTS: 

 

At the CHRC: 

 

·        If you’re Muslim, you can post that Gays should be “beheaded”.

·        If you’re a self-proclaimed “anti-racist” organization it’s fine to communicate that the “JEWSmedia hushes up MURDERS of Whites committed by NIGGERS ALL THE TIME AND EVERYWHERE! Not only in the U.S. of A."

·        BUT if you’re a young White woman whom the CHRC hate, you get hauled before a Kangaroo court for saying: “That drives me nuts, I take photos for the citizenship, passports, pr (permanent residence), visa cards etc. and as I have been told from human resourses that the ears MUST be visable, which means, if your hair covers your ears, it has to be tucked back.”

 

Does that sound like the CHRC has ANY interest in “eliminating hatred and racism in our country”?  Or does it sound more like they are motivated to eliminate their political opponents?

 

 

 

Thank you for your letter about the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

 

The NDP is fully committed to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its guarantee for freedom of expression coupled with the right of government to guarantee minority rights and ensure that discrimination is eliminated.

 

The ability of the Canadian Human Rights Commission to investigate alleged incidents where hate material or speech has been widely disseminated is crucial to guaranteeing Charter rights for all, and for understanding and eliminating hatred and racism in our country.

 

The call to delete Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act would eliminate the Commission’s power to investigate complaints. Hate crimes consist of any matter that is likely to expose a person or group to hatred or contempt because they as individuals or as a group are identifiable on the basis of a “prohibited ground of discrimination”. Section 13(1) guarantees the Canadian Human Rights Commission has the power to investigate the communication of those crimes by any means of telecommunications under the power of Parliament. 

 

Nonetheless, the NDP does have specific concerns regarding the Commission, including the issue of the appointments made to the Commission, such as the appointees’ level of experience and educational background on human rights judicial reviews. My NDP colleagues and I are constantly working to ensure there is a fair process that guarantees fundamental principles like freedom of expression.

 

Thanks again for writing.  I appreciate you taking the time to make me aware of your views on this important issue.

 

Sincerely,

 

Chris

 

Chris Charlton, MP Hamilton Mountain
Chief Opposition Whip
HAMILTON OFFICE:

232-845 Upper James St.
Hamilton, ON  L9C 3A3

(t) 905.574.3331  (f) 905.574.4980

OTTAWA OFFICE:

457-D Centre Block | House of Commons
Ottawa, ON  K1A 0A6
(t) 613.995.9389  (f) 613.992.7802

 

 

 

 

BTW, the CHRC spends it time looking at the race of every employee hired by the federal government to weed out what they have deemed “systemic discrimination”.   If a Federal Dept hired mostly one racial group (IE: Whites) it would be a massive hate crime and the government agency would be hauled before the Canadian Human Rights Commission to explain why they are so racist as to only hire one racial group.

 

BUT, since 1977 the Canadian human Rights Commission has ONLY ever accepted a “hate speech” complaints against White Canadians. When complaints are filed against Muslims and others, the CHRC summarily dismisses them.  But every single complaint against a “white”, “Christian” and/or “conservative” has been accepted.  TALK ABOUT SYSTEMIC DISCRIMINATION!

 

 

 

 

 


I need your help for the Appeal!

Fighting the fanatics at the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission and defending freedom of speech for ALL Canadians is not an easy task. In particular, the Federal Court of Canada challenge to defeat Canada’s internet censorship legislation, has consumed an immense amount of time and resources. This has meant sacrificing a lot of cherished things in my life that I used to take for granted such as spending precious time with my wonderful children. It's also very costly and has incurred heavy debts given that I'm facing a "Human Rights" juggernaut that has a limitless budget. It has already spent millions and is prepared to spend a lot more of your tax dollars to keep their thought control machine running.

 My courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka and myself have demonstrated what two dedicated researchers can accomplish against overwhelming odds. We have single-handedly and doggedly fought the system and exposed the corrupt underbelly of the "Human Rights" Commission's fanatics. Nothing ever comes easy when you are fighting such a racket. This case is a seminal one, where the outcome will have serious implications on our right to think and speak freely in this country for generations to come. All Canadians will benefit if we manage to get this shameful law expunged from our legal books.

 Every victory we've attained against the "Human Rights" juggernaut has come at great expense. Nothing has come easy.  In fact, the “Human Rights” Commission has done everything in their power to stop exposure of their twisted censorship agenda.

 I cannot carry on this important fight alone. Your donations literally equal the survival of this case. I wish to thank all those that have donated to this worthy cause. Please donate directly to us so that I can send out a personal thank you. If you have donated to another organization or individual please contact me so I can thank you directly and send you a copy of our special booklet that is for our supporters only.

Donate using a credit card online with PayPal

 

PayPal:   Send your donation to:   admin@stopsection13.com

MoneyBookers:  Send your donation to: marc@lemire.com

     

·        

http://www.StopSection13.com

http://www.freedomsite.org

http://blog.freedomsite.org

http://canadianhumanrightscommission.blogspot.com

 

   


 

Support Marc Lemire's Constitutional Challenge

 

Be part of our team and contribute what you can to defeat this horrible law 

and protect Freedom of Speech in Canada !

 

·         Via Mail: Send Cheque or Money Order to:

Marc Lemire

762 Upper James St

Box 384,

Hamilton, Ontario,

L9C 3A2

 

 

 

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Great News: Toronto area Conservative MP Corneliu Chisu supports Free Speech and Bill C-304 (An Act to remove the censorship powers from the fanatical CHRC)

Earlier today I received a fantastic letter from Toronto area Conservative MP Corneliu Chisu (Pickering-Scarborough) who support Bill C-304, an Act to Protect Freedom of Speech, and strip the censorship powers away from the fanatics of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

 

It is very impressive to see a Toronto-area Conservative MP stand-up for Freedom of Speech and seconding Bill C-304.  Unfortunately, Bill C-304 is a private members bill, and not (yet) a government bill, so it has a limited chance to even pass. According to the Parliament of Canada Website, since 1910 only 235 private members bills have ever passed. (789 private members’ bills were introduced during the last Parliament, and only four received Royal Assent, of which one established the National Holocaust Memorial).  But the wind is in the sails for freedom, and numerous Conservative AND Liberal MPs have spoken publically about freedom of speech and removing the ravenous censorship provision Section 13. (In fact it was Liberal MP Dr. Keith Martin who first proposed a motion in the House of Commons to remove Section 13) 

 

Here is the letter I received today:

 

 

Mr. Lemire,

 

Thank you for your letter that you sent to our Ottawa office regarding your request for Mr. Chisu to support C-304.

 

I am pleased to inform you that not only will Mr. Chisu be supporting the bill, but in fact he is a seconder for C-304 as well.

 

Regards,

 

Matthew van Vorstenbos

Legislative Assistant

Corneliu Chisu, MP Pickering-Scarborough East



 

 

What is wrong with Section 13 of the CHRA?

 

Sections 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act are a direct attack on the freedom of expression guaranteed to us under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The provisions of these sections allow the Canadian Human Rights Commission to prosecute anyone alleged to have said or written something “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” whether there is a living, breathing victim or not.

 

Vague concepts such as speech or writing “likely to cause hatred or contempt” are the basis of expensive state-funded prosecution of individuals. The statute provides no objective legal test for “hate” or any objective means of determining what constitutes “contempt”. As a result, the CHRC is used by various groups and individuals, as a risk-free taxpayer funded method to silence their critics and those they disagree with. CHRC investigators have testified that that “freedom of speech is an American concept” and therefore not valid in Canada. Such statements are contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but are standard operating procedure for the extremists at the CHRC.

 

Commissioners of the Canadians Human Rights Tribunal, who are not judges and are often not even lawyers, have held that “truth” is not a defence against prosecution under Section 13. In fact, if you argue the truth of your statements, it is then used as proof of your guilt, and a rational to increase the amount of fines! Intent or fair comment are also not defenses.  In fact, there is not a single listed defence under Section 13! Because of the lack of any defenses, the Tribunal has a 100% conviction rate since 1978. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal routinely ignores the principles of fundamental justice, such as the rules of evidence, and these kangaroo courts, even allow hearsay evidence.

 

On September 2, 2009 the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found in the Lemire case that Section 13 was unconstitutional and in violation of the Charter. In the decision the Tribunal slammed the CHRC for being aggressive and confrontational. In 2008, the CHRC’s own hand-picked expert – Richard Moon of the University of Windsor – wrote a substantial report on Section 13 with his main recommendation being to repeal it.

 

Every journalist, writer, Internet webmaster, publisher and private citizen in Canada can be the subject of a Human Rights complaint for expressing an opinion or telling the truth. Given the ambiguity of Section 13, it is virtually impossible for any individual to determine if they might be in violation of Section 13. Arbitrary censorship and punishment are wrong, and cannot be justified in a free society.

 

1: The Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal are not fair, and make arbitrary decisions based on who an accused is – rather than on a fair and impartial application of the statute they enforce. High profile victims, such as Macleans Magazine, Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant are given a free pass, while others, less prominent and lacking the resources to hire legal council are relentlessly prosecuted. Friends of the CHRC are given a free pass to promote hate with impunity, while others are dragged through 8 years of prosecutions. This creates a major chill on freedom of expression since there is no discernable “line” between speech that is prohibited and speech that is “acceptable” to the CHRC.

2: The CHRC pays no heed to constitutionally protected rights such as Freedom of Expression. In place they use imaginary “rights” such as the “right to be free from contempt”. There is no such right in our Charter. Lead investigators at the CHRC have testified that “freedom of speech is an American concept” which does not apply to Canadians. The CHRC only believes in “group” rights, and not the rights of individuals to “speak truth to power”, hence the 100% conviction rate.

3: The CHRC is out of control has recently been under a series of investigations. CHRC investigators have been criminally investigated by the RCMP for the criminal theft of telecommunications services; The Privacy Commissioner of Canada has ruled against the CHRC on multiple occasions. In the meantime, the CHRC continues to apply the law in an arbitrary and capricious manner.

4: In contravention of their mandate or the law, the CHRC has engaged in clandestine spying operations on Canadians, including using neo-Nazi aliases to engage Canadians in conversations.  The CHRC has even gone as far as posting questionable material on neo-Nazi internet websites. The CHRC shockingly attempted to claim it would injure “National Security” when information on their neo-Nazi accounts was subpoenaed by the Tribunal.

5: The entire process is paid for by taxpayers on behalf of the complainants. The defendants must pay their costs personally. There is no legal aid and there is no way to claim costs, even if the defendants are found innocent.

 

It’s time to abolish the Canadian Human Rights Commission and pack off this shameful censorship outfit to the “embarrassing lapses” dustbin of history. I have made some shocking allegations against the CHRC in this letter, and am more than willing to provide detailed documentation on each and every point I made in this letter.  If you would like further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

 

-Marc Lemire

Freedom Activist

www.freedomsite.org

www.stopsection13.com