Dear Editor,
Re: Death threats cannot be protected speech, December 14,
Whereas I appreciate the point that the commenter wishes to make, namely that speech calling for violence is abusive; this article abrogates the basic ethics of journalism by quoting a defendant's assertion given at a human rights hearingthat has never been settled.
Here is the phrase: "...the defence suggested Warman--a former CHRC employee--was among those who would post provocative messages to the site using fake identities, in the hope of entrapping other site users..."
Even though described as the "defendant's suggestion at hearing" this kind of quote causes the[...] newspaper to side in an as yet unsettled legal dispute. I certainly hope that the newspaper doesn't interfere with or make pronouncements on other legal proceedings in the same way.
I think Harry might have got the newspaper in question wrong, which is why the quick edit above. But otherwise he catches what is at the minimum some exceedingly shoddy reporting out of...you guessed it...CanWest.
Just for clarity, here's an expanded version of the quote he mentions:
During a CHRC tribunal considering the activities of Canadian website operator Marc Lemire, the defence suggested Warman--a former CHRC employee-- was among those who would post provocative messages to the site using fake identities, in the hope of entrapping other site users.
12 comments:
Harry Abrams, Fascist BCL, dude, you keep quoting Harry like this and you're going to end up looking like even more of a fool than you already do...
Hey Richard, you gonna start stalking me now? I thought you only did that with women bloggers.
By the way, your link might be defamatory if it even worked.
Back in your cage, NAMBLA Richard...you're stalking and harassing again.
...each incident adds up, you know.
Anway, from the link to the CanWest rag:
One may say one hates purple people, but to say purple people should be killed places the speaker irretrievably with other criminals who threaten, intimidate and extort other citizens.
Notice how they have to resort to using a meaningless example, "purple people," to avoid the nuances in this issue. What it one says "I hate Jews?" What if one, instead of saying "I hate Muslims," engages in a complex, dubiously-researched polemic that is aimed at doing nothing else but vilify Muslims and persuade others to hate them? What are essentially the differences here? And do we, as a society, have to endure it right up until someone crosses that line from simple hate speech to inciting violence and issuing death threats? Or until someone gets bashed or killed?
I'd rather have the tribunal than have to wait until that line is crossed, which by then, is too late.
Sorry to burst your bubble BCL, but Nazi's are leftist, not conservatives.
National Socialist Workers Party.
Kinda like the NDP eh.
Sorry to burst your bubble BCL, but Nazi's are leftist, not conservatives.
Ah, the killer argument. It had no effect the other 4 billion times the wingnuts used it, but this time, it took.
Robins, So why do Conservatives identify with them so closely?
So, if I may ask...why do you call him "NAMBLA Richard?"
"What are essentially the differences here? And do we, as a society, have to endure it right up until someone crosses that line from simple hate speech to inciting violence and issuing death threats? Or until someone gets bashed or killed?
I'd rather have the tribunal than have to wait until that line is crossed, which by then, is too late."
In fact Ti-Guy Bill White may have helped those of us who mhave been supporting hate-laws in this country.
BTW not to go too far off topic here, but for anyone who thought even for a remote second that Blazingcatfur does not give support to anti-Semitism check out the comments on this blog post of hers:
http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/2008/12/crazy-neo-nazi-indicted-for-threatening.html
There is quite a discussion going and one "anon" in particular is a flaming Jew-hater. BCF of course has not a word to say. Thankfully others do. In my view BTW, this blog is in violation of Section 13 and possibly even the criminal code laws against hatred.
Another muck-up that the Herald makes is in "Identifying Warman as "RW" on the Internet, the posting went on to list his home address…". The indictment refers to all of the people it refers to by initials. This is not how White referred to them.
Harry, he once pulled a stunt where he redirected traffic from a blogger's website to NAMBLA. He's been NAMBLA Dick ever since.
Post a Comment