Vilified Internet hate crusader was the real hero By Ber

[styky]

Vilified Internet hate crusader was the real hero


By Bernie Farber, The Ottawa Citizen June 22, 2012 7:06 PM

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Vilif ... z1yZCd8Ncj

[Julian]

Who's Bernie Farber?

Bernie M. Farber (born 1951)[1] is the former chief executive officer of the Canadian Jewish Congress[2] and a social activist. He has testified before the Canadian courts as an expert witness on hate crime.[3]

Farber was on leave from the CJC's successor, the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy during his candidacy as the Ontario Liberal Party's nominee in the 2011 Ontario election in the riding of Thornhill.[4]

He is rumoured to be in consideration for an appointment as Chief Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission once Barbara Hall's term ends in November 2012.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Farber

[Connie Fournier]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh5k-r6aRqM

[Narrow Back]

Is it April 1st?

[Edward Kennedy]

Is it April 1st?

Close enough

[LAR]

We still love you Bernie We're just not forced to say so anymore.

[free_life2]

And the heroes victims .... The poor, the mentally handicapped, the elderly.

[Julian]

And the heroes victims .... The poor, the mentally handicapped, the elderly.

How rude of you to inject the brutal shameful reality of this "hero" into the mix.

[Edward Kennedy]

...legend in his mind, like all the rest of the lefturds?

[Maikeru]

A hero sandwich, maybe...

Excerpts:
A key figure who utilized S13 to help defend ethnic and faith minorities against toxic speech is a friend and a person I consider a hero, Richard Warman. Sadly instead of gratitude Richard was victimized for his efforts.

While many did engage in a rational debate on S13, some scurrilously targeted him. It appeared they were more interested in their freedom to hate as opposed to their freedom of speech. In order to accomplish their goals they utilized the well worn technique of historical revisionism where they would take a grain of truth and build upon it a mountain of lies.

It was said of Richard Warman for example that he launched frivolous cases attacking people’s rights to free speech. The truth of course is much different.

The truth is that Canada's Parliamentarians extinguished Section 13 to protect Canadian humans from an abusive legal process.

Mr. Farber's public tongue bath of Richard Warman isn't the least bit surprising, as the CJC has been in the thick of human rights 'hate-speech' complaints since 1994, when the BCHRTribunal first entertained the Canadian Jewish Congress v. North Shore News and Collins Complaint, which led to the 1997 BCHRT Hearing.

The 'REASONS FOR DECISION' in that seminal 'blasphemy' trial ran to 107 pages - a 50,000 word document concocted from complaint against a single 800 word column which appeared in a 'free' neighbourhood newspaper, and penned by Journalist Doug Collins.

The preamble of the Decision led to a simple sentence by Tribunal Member Nitya Iyer, found on page 80:
"Therefore, I find that the complaint is not justified."

The actual purpose of the proceedings was to establish the validity of quasi-judicial 'blasphemy' trials, and it didn't really matter whether the Complaint was upheld, as the BCHRT 'Abrams v. Collins' Complaint was already being processed.
The CJC v. Collins case was a legal exercise meant to 'soften the ground' for the second, and subsequent Hearing against Collins, for the same column (plus three others) which triggered the first.

But enough of the 'mountain of lies' used to smother 'grains of truth' before the 90's were over.

Bernie is dissembling when he discounts the claims that Richard Warman launches 'frivolous lawsuits'.

What could be more frivolous than copywriting the 'Maximum©Disruption' lecture years after the fact, to prevent FreeDominion members from referring to that document in defence against a 'frivolous cyber-lawsuit' launched against FreeDominion hosts and members, which referenced posts by 35 different members ?

What could be more frivolous than associating with 'Anti-Racist Canada' , an internet site which 'anonymously' engages in demonizing FreeDominion at any and every opportunity ? :

Bernie Farber + Richard Warman = FreeDominion ??

Richard Warman gained the accolades he received from Mr. Farber, and the CJC, for his 'Internet hate crusade' - and deserves the public opprobrium he has received for same.

July 2007 - everything's coming up roses...

Labels:
* BIGCITYLIB STRIKES BACK
* Dawg's Blawg
* Nosferatu200
* One Peoples Project
* Richard Warman
* Warren Kinsella

[Angleland]

Did or did not this supposedly great crusader post hateful messages on the internet?

I suppose this great crusader was not the first to engage in scams. CSIS helped set up the Heritage Front with that fraud Nathan Black aka Grant Bristow The Great.

[Angleland]

Bernie Farber - isn't that the guy AKA 'Moleface' to whom Preston Manning, the not so great leader of the Reform Party of Canada, handed over the entire party membership list to be vetted?

I'm not sure who is the biggest jack@$$ between the two - Bernie or Presto.

[Edward Kennedy]

Does farber hate terrorists who victimize the citizens of Israel? Does he hate roast python? Does he hate National Socialists? Does he or does he not have a right to hate? Does he hate the politically incorrect?

Perhaps those who are legends n their own minds should attack and question God for His hatred of the "workers of iniquity", or more urgently, look at themselves and see if they qualify as those God hates.

[Maikeru]

Salami, Salami, Baloney...

Without Section 13, All Hate Crimes Are the Same
Posted: 06/22/2012 5:27 pm

Section 13 (S13) of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA), which prohibited the promotion of hatred and contempt via the internet and telephone, is now dead. To be sure there was a long, passionate, rancorous and sometimes downright unseemly debate over both its effectiveness and whether it limited free speech in Canada. In my view it was a necessary discussion even if in the end we lost what I have always held to be a valuable tool to defend vulnerable minorities in Canada.

As a result of MP Brian Storseth's Private members Bill to repeal S13, consequences and remedies we once had under a civil rule of procedure to deal appropriately with the promulgation of hatred is no longer. Where a complaint under S13 could result in cease and desist orders or at most a fine, today the only tool left to guard against hate promotion targeting Jews, LGBTQ, First Nations, Muslims and other faith and ethnic groups are the hate laws, sections 318 and 319 of the criminal code. Convictions will mean a criminal record and perhaps even jail.

Some argued that with the criminal code, the case first requires the approval of the province's Attorney-General to proceed. Then they note that cases are heard under proper jurisprudence. This is true. However outside the A-G's approval S13 cases were also heard under proper rules of juridical procedure in the same manner as any other lawfully appointed provincial or federal tribunal.

Indeed mental health cases heard under tribunal where the most sacred of all our rights, freedom from unwarranted detention, are decided following the same procedures as did S13 tribunals. Similarly, labour tribunals that could decide loss of employment or immigration review panels where the right to live in Canada is judged on a regular basis.

The debate on S13 began as a result of complaints leveled against McLean's where provocative columnist Mark Steyn had written what some believed to be an offensive harangue against Islam. The second complaint targeted then Western Standard publisher Ezra Levant who reprinted the now infamous Mohammed cartoons. In Levant's case the complaint was filed under the Alberta Human Rights provision on hate speech while in Steyn's case, complaints were filed with the BC and Ontario Human Rights Commissions as well as the federal CHRA. This was done after some young Muslim Canadian lawyers failed to receive what they believed to be a fair hearing from Maclean's magazine on the Steyn article.

The irony of the history related to S13 is that while these cases became the catalyst for the eventual ensuing debate led aggressively by Levant and Steyn, neither of these cases was ever heard under the CHRA. Levant's was never a S13 case and the Steyn complaint was dismissed.

In the end, the Levant case was also dismissed by the Alberta Commission while the Steyn complaint did proceed under BC human rights law to tribunal. The case was finally dismissed by the adjudicator following a long and in my view totally uncalled for hearing.

Were there problems with S13? Yes. The issue of speed in dealing with vexatious claims; the lack of provisions for falsely accused complainants to recoup financial losses and I came more and more to believe that punishing fines as opposed to cease and desist orders changed the whole tenor of human rights applications. Punishment, as will now be the only option under the criminal code, should never have been an option for S13.

S13 did not go without a spirited fight. Many laudably argued that fully repealing S13 was akin to throwing out the baby with the bathwater. MP Irwin Cotler one of Canada's most eminent human rights advocates summed it up best when he addressed Parliament on this very issue:

...the debate we should be having tonight should be regarding how we might reform and structure the human rights commissions to protect freedom of expression while protecting vulnerable individuals and minorities from hate and group vilifying speech rather than committing ourselves to abolishing the entire regime ...

Professor Cotler got it right. Of the few hate-related S13 cases that went to tribunal, all were of the vilest hate where calls for mass murder of Jews, Gays, Muslims, First Nations and others were posted. All the other complaints were solved either through negotiation or simply dismissed.

On June 6 the vote in Parliament was close. The Conservatives using their majority passed the repeal of S13 153-136. With only the criminal code left for protection I hope Parliament did not bite off its nose to spite its face.

[backhoe]

Salami, Salami, Baloney...

Indeed.
( Disclaimer: I realize this is deadly serious for the defendants in these cases- but I'm just sayin'... )

The whole convoluted affair has a chase-your-tail, pretzel logic air to it to me, standing back in America with our Bill of Rights. How in Hell did a nation founded on English Common Law allow itself to get so XXXXed up?

You have lunatics running the asylum. And commenting on each other. Then snarking on the comments... Somebody, stop the insanity.