36 Replies to “Since We Were Having The “Freedom of Speech” Discussion, Anyway…”

  1. Kate….surely you know that minorities cannot possibly do hate crimes against another minority!!After all, he is just saying what he feels(won’t say “thinks”,as he doesn’t) about Joooosss.And like WASP’s and other Christians,they are legitimate targets. How can a poor,depressed by the white man, Injun possibly know anything about what is hate??

  2. Isn’t the point about free speech that Ahenakew can say whatever the hell he wants and get tried in the court of public opinion which is where this really belongs.

  4. I’m typically left to most people here, but freedom of speech is definitely an area where I deviate. This should have never seen a court, just as all cases regarding “hate speech” or other unpopular utterances should not see courts. I don’t agree with a word this idiot said, but the legal system is no place to process these people. Unless he’s inciting violence or some kind of tangible impact beyond hurt feelings, then keep this crap out of the courts.
    If Ahenakew can be charged for what he said, I wouldn’t be surprised to one day see Kate defending herself in court for the interpretations of some of her comments by powerful lobbies within Canadian society.

  5. Penny: Yes, that’s the whole point. I don’t need the HRC to decide for me that the man is unhinged – I can do that on my own.

  6. Another example of why hate laws are wrong. As a Jew I would never endorse what he said at the time, but if we truly have the right to free speech then we must defend his right also. I would prefer to expose such rubbish to the light of facts and public opinion than to remove his right to free speech. Hate laws and HRC are so wrong that it boggles the mind how anyone with a brain could defend them.
    Back to the case in point he (from what I recall) did not incite violence or attacks on Jews and clearly no pogrom took place afterwards. Yet we do have in this country individuals calling for the beheading and murder of non believers. A very big difference in my opinion. So where are all our thought police?

  7. Indian trumps black, black trumps gender, non-white gender trumps white gender. Nowadays any kind of Jew trumps no one. Does that mean that all white males are Jews?
    “There is no sound you can make with your mouth that should send you to jail” Frank Zappa … long ago.

  8. Steve, glad to hear that. Most of my lefty friends really don’t give a rip and are happy to see Jews and Christians hauled in front of the Bolshevik Truth Tribunals. They rub their useful idiot hands with glee when they hear that people have been silenced by the government.

  9. I heard on great authority, Danny Millions was furious his alma mater Mount Cashal was closed. He met many a “fine young fellow there” he said.
    Well people say he said it, I wasn’t there. Redmonton is a long ways away.

  11. Steve and Penny: I completely agree with you. He wasn’t inciting to violence … his comments were the ignorant ramblings of a fool … and that’s that. Public opinion will convict him in Canada and acquit him among Jew-haters … so we should let it be. Idiots like him are easy to beat in the battle for ideas … as long as we can express our ideas freely. With the New Media now in play … we all have a voice.

  12. “Most of my lefty friends really don’t give a rip and are happy to see Jews and Christians hauled in front of the Bolshevik Truth Tribunals”
    Yes, it really is a shame when you realize just how tenuous our rights and freedoms are, that the people to your left and right would trash your basic rights in a heartbeat given the chance.

  13. What I find really ironic about this whole HRC kangaroo court fiasco is that it’s Muslims who want to take away my freedom of speech and press while my rights are being defended by a Jew who says anyone should have the right to say whatever they want including mocking Christianity (which is done daily by the loonie left).
    The HRCs sure picked the wrong group to side with on this issue. They should have refused to accept the complaint in the first place so that they could have stayed under the radar as they quietly took away our liberties one at a time
    The good out of all this is that these commissioned are disbanded altogether as a waist of money and time unless they allow equal access both in time and money to both parties AND the right to face your accuser – as is our British tradition. Since Liberals have struggled for decades to hide our British heritage it would make sense that we can’t use the Magna Carta rule anymore. Darn.

  14. I’m glad the guy’s conviction was quashed. Nobody should be hauled to court for having an opinion, no matter how idiotic the opinion may be.
    In fact, the crazier the opinion, the sillier it appears when the individual is hauled into court.
    Ahenakew’s comments were so absurd that triggering a legal battle gives them a legitimacy that they surely don’t deserve.

  16. sf, when you say “to the left and right of you” it may come as a shock to you, but what you consider “to the right of you” actually in this day and age exists ONLY “to the left of you” Fascism is a product of the Left if you haven’t heard.

  17. I agree with most here. There’s no reason for Ahenakew to have been hauled to court. His comments should have just gone on record and then he would have been exposed as at best an idiot and at worst a bigot. To get the courts involved was ludicrous. It was no different with Jim Keegstra. The beauty of the whole Keegstra case was the deep and powerful irony that led to his exposure. Keegstra nattered on about the Jews for years, and nobody really gave a damn. Then, one day he tells the class that the IRA received funding and support form the KGB. Kid with a name like Murphy or Dunne goes home and tells his mom the same story. Her dad had been an IRA terrorist. She goes ballistic because nobody, but nobody accuses her dad of being a commie, and goes public with the whole “Jews Control The World” theories of Jim Keegstra. The rest, as they say, is history. At some level, the absurdity of that whole turn of events is almost Python-esque.

  18. Doug:
    I agree. While fascism has found a home on the right in days past, today it is found almost exclusively on the left.
    In my previous comment, I was using the terms left and right literally, in the sense that many people who surround you on the streets have no respect for, or even understanding of, the concept of human rights. Most people, given the chance to outlaw opinions that they don’t like, would do it in an instant.

  19. I agree with the decision also. I can make up my own mind if this man is an ass hole or not, I don’t need some simple servant [SS] type to make it for me. In this case I think he is an asshole.

  21. Merle,
    Either you’re an idiot or a member of the Dixie Chicks because you don’t seem to understand the difference between free speech and libel. Free speech is speech that is free from government interference or restriction. It is not freedom to say anything with no consequences.
    Good luck in your lawsuit. I recommend you represent yourself.

  22. Sf
    Good catch. Warren has a long history of whining and spinning in the same breathe. The fact that he uses a recent comment to justify his long standing policy of unquestioned “Musings” is self promoting piffle to the enth degree.
    I expect nothing less from an immature ,wanna be punker/dilettante.
    Syncro

  23. The legal decision has been made on this guy. Let it go. The emphasis now should be on pushing for the dismantling of the HRCs.
    In AB – I would like to see the entire human rights commission dismantled and their budget used to set up two special prosecutor’s offices – one in Calgary & one in Edmonton – and hire some high powered crown attorneys/staff to take on the high profile criminal cases. The buildings/offices/etc are in place now – all it would take is a change of personnel.
    $2M/yr could also be acquired by removing the two CEOs of the two health care regions. Not to mention that if you check the web site, you will see where the AB HRC just awarded grants in the amount of a cool $0.5M to about 12 special groups – yearly affair, no doubt, so this money could also be used.

  24. I think that what has been ignored is that Mr.Ahenekew did not make an original statement.He only repeated what he heard in Germany while serving as a Canadian soldier sometime after WW2.He repeated what he had been told even tho if he had been in Germany before WW2,he would have been on the same list as jews.

  25. Spike, I don’t think it matters if it was an original thought or not. As long as he doesn’t issue a call to kill all Jews, let him shoot his mouth off.

  26. I’m trying to remember who, if anyone besides close friends, came forward to defend Mr. Ahenekew’s right to free speech at the time. Not Ezra I’d bet, or Mark Steyn and not me.
    This has been in the back of my mind during the last couple of days reading about this subject.
    How many here can say that you supported his rights?

  27. Well, apparently Kate supported his rights.
    “I had problems with the fact that charges were laid.
    If what Ahenakew said was hate speech, then what do you say about any number of mainstream media guests who say very nearly the same thing about “Americans”?
    He wasn’t advocating violence, only saying stupid things.
    Denounced, condemned, fired – yes.
    Apprehended by the state – no.”
    Posted by: Kate at June 8, 2006 4:48 PM

  28. This case cost the publisher $203,000 to defend.
    In a surprise ruling, the British Columbia (Canada) Human Rights Tribunal rejected a complaint by a major Jewish organization against veteran journalist Doug Collins and his publisher, the North Shore News, for an allegedly anti-Jewish column on the “Schindler’s List” motion picture. The Tribunal found that the opinion piece, which took aim at Holocaust claims, did not violate a provincial “anti-hate” law.
    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n1p-2_Weber.html
    And we don’t have the court resources to prosecute the Hell’s Angels…….

  29. I defended Ahenakews’ right to say what he wanted.I don’t have it written anywhere but I often told people that he has the right to be stupid if he likes. I was just happy to see those remarks come from the mouth of an aboriginal,as then people could maybe see that it is not just whitey who is a racist.I defend and support Ezra also and will do all I can to get the HRCs disbanded.

  30. Like most here I don’t think Ahenakew should have faced criminal charges. I’m not even sure I was aware of it at the time. I do believe that revoking his Order of Canada was the right thing to do.

  31. I am all for free speech as long as it does not offend commercial patent or copyright interests or lead to the death of Canadian citizens. Personally I do not think that Ahenakew is a threat to Jews. Even if he stood up in front of a group of aboriginals and urged them to go out and kill Jews I don’t think any Jews would be in danger. But whether Jews are killed or not because of what Ahenakew said is not the point.
    The test for hate speech should be clear incitement to do bodily harm to a definable group. If a “leader” (of a never to be mentioned group for fear of the thought police coming for a visit) of a certain group told his congregation to go out and kill a passel of Jews for a free ticket to paradise, youngsters from that special group would almost certainly be a threat to Jews.
    We must treat all who incite people to kill other people the same even if an ignorant old blowhard could not get his people to work at killing Jews. Failure to do so will open the door for some pretty radical pep rallies in certain religious institutions.
    Just because Ahenakew is insignificant does not mean that this case is not worth following through to a firm conclusion.

  32. Gunney99: This case cost the publisher $203,000 to defend.
    I apologize for this post. Although I’m sure the particular news story is correct, the web site seems devoted to anti-Jewish, anti-conservative sentiment. I don’t recommend it.

  34. There are two parts to this:
    Part one is that this case deviates from the Ezra/Steyn cases in that this was a criminal case herd in a real court using real standards of jurisprudence. There is a fair process.
    Part two is that part one shouldn’t be necessary as the idea that a thought crime should be on the books or that a law limiting speech is anathema to liberal society. This case, this law, is a travesty of justice, a bastardization of the Magna Carta, the Canadian Constitutions (old and new,) and the entire western inheritance developed over more than 800 years. Only someone as addled as Kinsella could condone it.
    It’s been a long time since Savonarola was burning books he deemed unacceptable in front of the Medici Villa in Florence. Too bad there are zealots and fools, still.

  35. EyesWideShut
    Thank you for the link.
    I am not unhappy to be wrong about Ezra.
    I was more concerned with my own lack of reaction when Mr. Ahenakew was charged with spreading hate back in 2003. Maybe the difference for me was that he was charged under the criminal code, but I should have still seen it for what it was.

  36. And still on the topic of Free Speech….I was over at LGF and saw (stole?)the following….
    Muslim at Marks and Spencer refuses to sell a Bible because it is “unclean” We are going to lose this war of Shariah if we don’t wake up!
    [Link: shariahfinancewatch.wordpress.com…]
    read the whole article there
    Imagnine if it read “Christian refuses to sell koran to a muslimn because it (koran)is unclean.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation