Saturday, November 15, 2008

You can't make this stuff up.


Isn’t this just the perfect representation of the oh-so-exciting events at the Conservative Party’s mouthbreathing Policy Convention?


18 comments:

Pearce Richards said...

There is now an update at the site... The repealing of s. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act passed workshop and will go to the "convention plenary"

And we all know why Ezra will be so jazzed about this... It frees up restrictions on hate speech online.

Freedom of speech, meet section 1 of the Charter.

Pearce Richards said...

Now, I should clarify, s. 13 has been abused through the use of arguably frivolous lawsuits. However, I believe the INTENT of the law is sound, the act of preventing hate speech from being disseminated online.

MgS said...

The free speechers are about to walk into an even uglier proposition.

In the absence of the relatively gentle process the CHRC implements, they stand to find themselves facing criminal charges under S318/319 of the Criminal code. (Something that hasn't been exercised much yet, but take away the CHRC avenue for these things, and suddenly the Criminal Code becomes the avenue of redress.

Pearce Richards said...

I think that's what they're calling for though - to have these matters dealt with in the actual courts.

However, As R. v. Zundel shows us, it can be difficult to prosecute hate speech through the traditional court system.

Also, s. 13 of the act applies specifically to electronic messages. It was designed to protect targeted groups from attack online, and to curb the spread of hate speech through the internet on Canadian servers.

The act, in my opinion, needs to be clarified to prevent frivolous abuse and wasted time in the courts. It should not be struck down without having some measure to replace it. Otherwise, we are sending the message that it is okay to spread hate speech online.

The Seer said...

1. So many of the BT's, including but not limited to Ezra himself, are nutcases that it is reasonable in law and practice to adopt a rebuttable presumption that any person who falls within the class of BT's is an incorrigible nutcase.

2. Incorrigible nuttiness is a disability, within the meaning of § 3(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

3. Lulu, M@, psa and CC, individually and acting in concert, employ the intertubz to hold identifiable BT's to contempt on the basis of their incorrigible nuttiness.

4. From time to time, Lulu, M@, psa and CC, have suffered and permitted certain Commenter, including but not limited to ty-guy, Red Tory, Kevron and The Inimitable NAMBLER to represent that I as just as nutty as the average BT'er, and CC has come close to the same himself.

5. The very nature of the Internet makes ‘repeated’ communication inevitable and deliberate.

WHEREFORE, in behalf of myself and all BT's who do not succeed in rebutting the presumption that they are incorrigible nutcases, I complain that Lulu, M@, psa , CC, ty-guy, Red Tory, Kevron and The Inimitable NAMBLER have, through the use and employment of these tubz, communicated matters that are likely to expose me and them to distaste, abhorrence and abomination, scorn, disdain and loathing, contrary to the form of Section 13, and against the Queen's peace, and her dignity, and pray that I be awarded damages from Lulu, M@, psa , CC, ty-guy, Red Tory, Kevron and The Inimitable NAMBLER,and each of them, in the amount of $20,000 (Cdn) for myself, and an additional $20,000 (Cdn) to me in trust for each of the BT's, including but not limited to Ezra himself, for each such act of invidious discrimination.

I promise I will administer all trust funds in a fair and equitable manner.

This relief will make me feel better.

Ti-Guy said...

The act, in my opinion, needs to be clarified to prevent frivolous abuse and wasted time in the courts.

I don't agree. Tinker with the act and you end up with speech codes. Complaints are deemed frivolous when they're dismissed at the time they're mediated. They can streamline the process, but those are administrative changes that don't require changes in legislation.

Ezra Levant and many "conservatives" of his ilk have gone on record to state that they oppose human rights protection in toto (remember Ezra's "It's the Stupid Charter" when he campaigned against equal marriage?) They assert that these protections distort society by protecting/promoting mediocrity and by punishing the meritorious (talented geniuses like Ezra Levant, for example). They want all these issues dealt with through much more expensive regular tort law, which is good business for lawyers and assures that only rich people can have their rights protected.

This is just a first step in weakening that protection.

KEvron said...

i'm a yank, seer.

KEvron

KEvron said...

....but, by all means, sue the rest of them shirtless.

KEvron

Ti-Guy said...

Incorrigible nuttiness is a disability, within the meaning of § 3(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

You have to have documentation from mental health professionals before you can even think of lodging a complaint on those grounds. And if the BT's, in the hopes of getting a cash settlement from me, all submit to psychiatric assessments, well...Hallelujah! I'll make the appointments for them and write out the cheque at the same time.

wv: "experst"

The Seer said...

kevron, with a sneer, says

"I'm a Yank, seer,"

like he thinks a Yank can use the tubz in Canada without coming within the legislative authority of Parliament.

Hah!

Tell it to the Mounties when they drag you away!

Besides, under US due process rules, any jurisdiction in which a publication is published has jurisdiction over lawsuits resulting therefrom.

I might settle for three kegs. This is the best offer you're going to get.

KEvron said...

"with a sneer"

i never!

"I might settle for three kegs. This is the best offer you're going to get"

a set of ginzu knives (almost misb!) and a muni transfer, good yesterday. youy pay the postage. done?

KEvron

Wayne said...

It passed.

Pearce Richards said...

It may have passed... But it is non-binding. So far...

Not to say they will see parliament as a barrier... they will probably just make it a confidence matter and scare the liberals into voting for it.

Red Tory said...

Good luck with your action "Seer"! LOL

The "Inimitable NAMBLER"... Oh my, that's priceless. What a great new name for Dick.

Ti-Guy said...

It passed.

Good. Now maybe you'll remember to wear some clothes when you're hanging curtains in the kitchen, Wayne.

M@ said...

Seer, if you can get a court document to show that any of the BTs are disabled because of their nuttiness, I'll pay up. It would be worth the $20k to shut some of those morons up.

liberal supporter said...

They're not mentally disabled, it is just a problem of being constipated. According wayne, it passed. So they'll start being normal now.

Why yes, I am in the market for that bridge to Brooklyn.

mikmik said...

3. Lulu, M@, psa and CC, individually and acting in concert, employ the intertubz to hold identifiable BT's to contempt on the basis of their incorrigible nuttiness.
Oh, the humanity.
Okay, go back to next week. I mean you! This post is so old, but I have an excuse!
Oh, BTW, it is only actionable 'hate speech' if any negative opinion or contrary opinion is directed against neo-rascist blooging tory dipshits (I said blooging), otherwise, it is considered to be a healthy exchange of ideas.
See!? I am liable!
(Hah, my word verification is 'merdiess'
)