Freespeechiness Roundup

Have been letting the Canuckistan situation lapse:

* ~ * ~ *

Steynianism 138: On the Internet and its threats

As a welcome tool for the powers that be, old-media, and power-mongers, let’s face it: a free web is the enemy. Ordinary peasants like you and me with info, connections, Googling facts, and making blogs and websites on any possible topic? Troublesome. Uppity...God & Jesus & Christianity? Bad. Roman Christianity? Very bad. Internet? Bad. Free speech? Really bad. Peasant slavery? Good. Prison/ re-education camps? Good. Sponsoring terrorism? Good. Oil & Jihad? Good. Democratic freedoms? Very very bad.

* ~ * ~ *

From the Canadian Department of Justice: Truth and Fair Comment No Defence in Human Rights cases

The defences of truth and fair comment remain available to torts such as defamation and seditious libel, regardless of the medium in which they occur. However, none of the traditional media can avail themselves of these defences in cases of alleged hate propaganda, whether the communication appears in print, on television or on a website.

38. As the Federal Court has explained, defences that may be available in tort actions are not available in cases of hate propaganda because the prohibition is concerned with adverse effects, not with intent.

[traduc: it is a crime only if the person who is offended against feels offended.]

"I guess that's why the new totalitarians equate Oriana Fallaci a journalist who told the truth, with Ernst Zundel an anti-Semite who lied because truth does not matter."

* ~ * ~ *

You can now join a Facebook group at which some Canuckstani Infidels are raging against the dying of democracy:

Here's how the Canadian Human Right's Commission works (CHRC): If an individual feels offended by what somebody has written, they can go to the commission, lodge a complaint and the commission’s lawyers will investigate the case at taxpayers’ expense. Although the plaintiff pays nothing, the defendant must defend themselves with their own money, and if they are found guilty, they must pay fines out of their own pocket and can be subjected to lifetime bans on their ability to talk about certain issues.

An act as simple as posting the picture of Muhammad could be considered a hate crime, and in fact, there are people currently being forced to defend themselves in front of the commission for doing just that. In another case, a Maclean’s magazine article was investigated for hate crime violations after the President of the Canadian Islamic Congress found it offensive to Muslims.

* ~ * ~ *

Kathy:

On June 2, Mark Steyn will be convicted of "spreading true news."

What a difference twenty years makes. And we have liberal self-aggrandizing bathroom Nazi hunters and cowardly, careerist Conservative hacks to thank for this, not just arrogant, ignorant Muslim beligerents.

Those of you who've been placing your trust and hope in electoral party politics -- and not just on this issue -- are deluded. By all means continue to write letters and sign petitions, but bear in mind that they will mostly be either ignored or will not be able to change the minds of a sufficient number of time serving cowards.

However, you can always live as we've already won:

Write and draw what you will. Step out in faith. Don't ask for permission first or apologize later.

Change the culture -- the Law will catch up later. Or not. But we can't afford to wait.

You can always get another job. But you only have one conscience.

OK, now, go throw a little money towards the defense fund. Also, R.A.G.E. Media and others are setting up internet things that allow you to buy or receive some cool stuff that will contribute to the cause.