[Clicker]

Canada's censor police lurk in the background.

[Wheatfield]

Zundel was deported for promoting hate through his website not for his belief that the holocaust never happend. (EDIT: actually looks like the initial court rulings were overturned based on freedom of speech, later he left Canada before the Human Rights Commission trial was finished, then the US deported him, then Germany put him in prison, so clearly it wasnt just us that thought this guy needed to be separated from society, and we actually protected his right to free speech in our courts, he wasnt even a citizen)

In Germany, holocaust denying itself is a jailable offense, so he was guilty under their laws whether we considered it hate speech or not. By the time he was detained in the US and sent here, the 9/11 hysteria was in full swing and the USA was deporting people for having hangnails.

I agree that websites can pretty much do what they want on their own turf in terms of deleting posts. I had a similar experience to you here as well Wheat.

Our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which protects our citizens is actually now used more than any other document (including the US Constitution) for countries creating new/revised constitutions, they tend to like the language we use below, vs say entrenched rights to bear arms. 30th anniversary of its creation was last week actually, though the conservatives barely mentioned it, no surprise.

I don't think Harper really likes the Charter all that much. He is too close to being a pocket dictator to appreciate the freedoms of the people he rules.

[Deimos]

In Germany, holocaust denying itself is a jailable offense, so he was guilty under their laws whether we considered it hate speech or not. By the time he was detained in the US and sent here, the 9/11 hysteria was in full swing and the USA was deporting people for having hangnails.

I don't think Harper really likes the Charter all that much. He is too close to being a pocket dictator to appreciate the freedoms of the people he rules.

It is also Pierre Trudeau's Liberal Party Legacy so certainly nothing they want to promote. Actually the one mention he made of it was in a negative context in regards to Quebec being left out, which is true. But there is a lot to celebrate/be proud of with regards to the CCRF

[Wheatfield]

It is also Pierre Trudeau's Liberal Party Legacy so certainly nothing they want to promote. Actually the one mention he made of it was in a negative context in regards to Quebec being left out, which is true. But there is a lot to celebrate/be proud of with regards to the CCRF

Quebec can ratify the Charter any time they want. They don't want to because doing so would force them to accept the legitimacy of English within their province and force them to dismantle their French language laws which are very discriminatory towards English in Quebec.
Count on Harper to get that wrong as well.

[audiobomber]

Does the Sun own the website that the comments were pulled from? If so, they have every right to decide what they want visible. Your right to free speech ends at my door, so to speak.

I agree with that. There is no guarantee of free speech on a private website. It's disappointing though that they won't allow dialog, and clearly illustrates the paper's conservative bias.

While saying "the holocaust didn't happen" is wrong and stupid, it isn't advocating hatred of killing of anyone.
But apparently in Canada, you don't have to advocate hatred, all you have to do is offend a particular group of people and you end up in all sorts of trouble (Zundel spent a couple of years in solitary confinement and was then deported as a security risk).

It doesn't bother me that Neo Nazi Zundel had a hard time in Canada. In the end, charges were overturned by the Supreme Court, thanks to our magnificent, modern Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That was the right answer, but I don't think the authorities should apologize for trying to convict him, and I'm certainly glad his citizenship application was rejected.

[Wheatfield]

I agree with that. There is no guarantee of free speech on a private website. It's disappointing though that they won't allow dialog, and clearly illustrates the paper's conservative bias.

I expect they allow dialogue as long as it fit's their ideology......

It doesn't bother me that Neo Nazi Zundel had a hard time in Canada. In the end, charges were overturned by the Supreme Court, thanks to our magnificent, modern Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That was the right answer, but I don't think the authorities should apologize for trying to convict him, and I'm certainly glad his citizenship application was rejected.

While it doesn't bother me that Canadians gave him a rough ride, it does bother me that the government used it's cudgel in an attempt to stifle his right to free speech. That the charges were overturned proves the government was wrong, and that Zundel should be apologized to for wrongful prosecution. Doing this would potentially open the government up to a lawsuit by Zundel, and would certainly put the government in a position of having to pay out to him for whatever costs he accrued, which would be political suicide for whatever government did it.
The last thing a government wants is to be paying money to an Ernst Zundel. I'm certain the B'nai Brith Canada would call that a hate crime.
I don't think he brings anything desirable to the table that would make us want him as a citizen, so rejecting his application was the right thing to do.

[riff]

Where censorship is wrong is when the government itself practices it. While I don't agree with hate speech, I feel the hate speech laws are wrong, since they can easily be a slippery slope towards though control.

On the other hand if it is allowed you end up with fox news at the milder end and various often white and stupid hate groups having a platform to incite, recruit and organize. Given that half the population is below average intelligence they can be extremely effective in promotion of their particular agenda and extremely disruptive to society as a whole.

I certainly see your point, it's a difficult issue. I suppose all in all I would prefer 'they' didn't have a voice. One question is "is our children learning anything".

---

Last edited by riff; 04-27-2012 at 12:37 PM.

[Wheatfield]

On the other hand if it is allowed you end up with fox news at the milder end and various often white and stupid hate groups having a platform to incite, recruit and organize. Given that half the population is below average intelligence they can be extremely effective in promotion their particular agenda and extremely disruptive to society as a whole.

I certainly see your point, it's a difficult issue. I suppose all in all I would prefer 'they' didn't have a voice. One question is "is our children learning anything".

Regarding Faux News, the CRTC refused their application because they didn't meet the criteria that is required in Canada to be a news organization.
There are other ways to skin cats (or fauxes as the case may be)
I would prefer that "they" didn't exist at all, but in the grans scheme of things, it's probably better to know who they are than not to.