November 30, 2007

Speech someone uses that states someone "is against free speech" is itself criminal

People who think the US should be "more like Canada" ought to check this out:

Richard Warman, a lawyer who worked as an investigator for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, often filed complaints against "hate speech" sites complaints that were generally upheld under Canadian speech restrictions. [Paul] Fromm, a defender of various Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites, has been publicly condemning Warman for, among other things, being "an enemy of free speech." Warman sued, claiming that these condemnations are defamatory.

Canada doesn't have a First Amendment like we do here in the States. "Hate" Internet sites can be shut down (the KKK could get in legal trouble for operating a website in Canada). While I obviously abhor Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites, I certainly believe they should have a right to express their [pathetic] views. That's the essence of free speech. At any rate, the kicker is that a Canadian court ruled for Warman -- "chiefly on the grounds that because Warman's claims were accepted by the legal system, they couldn't accurately be called an attack on free speech "!!

This is beyond preposterous. Under Canadian law, it's possible people could be found to have "defamed," say, OJ Simpson for calling him a "murderer," since a criminal court found him "not guilty" of that crime. (Maybe there's an "out" here since the civil court found him liable for the two deaths; who knows.) Under Canadian law, George Bush could actually use the DoJ to fine (or arrest) protestors who call him "an enemy of free speech" since said protestors have to do their protesting in an "approved" area. Since it is a lawful act to require protestors to keep themselves within a certain distance from the president and within a certain geographical area, these protestors would be engaging in "defamation" of the president!

Funny how I haven't seen the MSM or anyone (yet) from the Left criticize this ruling, especially since the Left believes that George Bush and 2007 America are the second coming of Hitler and Nazi Germany, respectively. The unfortunate truth for these loons however, is that the United States is MUCH more free when it comes to people's speech than our neighbors to the north and in Europe. Keep this in mind when dolts like those from Code Pink think that "free speech" equals the "right to disrupt" hearings or other people's speech.

UPDATE: Conservative columnist Mark Steyn may get into "trouble" via Canada's ridiculous lack of a 1st Amendment because of an excerpt from his latest book (about Islam).


Posted by Hube at November 30, 2007 07:06 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)