jbg Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) January 22, 2014 was a sad day for Canada and Canada's freedoms. I was a poster at Freedomininion.ca from March 12, 2004 to June 26, 2006 when I was banned. I was banned for reasons that are not important here. Over the years I made many friends at FD with whom I still keep in contact. THat is not the reason for my sadness though. Freedominion was just shut down as a result of a judgment of an Ontario court (link to article, excerpts below): Conservative website shuttered after libel ruling OTTAWA — The online political forum, Free Dominion, has shut down after a wholesale defeat in a libel case brought by Ottawa human rights lawyer Richard Warman. A jury concluded that Warman was maliciously defamed by four commentators on Free Dominion, a website that bills itself as “the voice of principled conservatism.” Freedom of speech is a great concept in theory and in practice. Fools quickly expose themselves and ideas of merit rise. Freedom is not for the coward or the feint of heart. Those can take shelter, quite easily, in the legal equivalent of their mother's womb, in a dictatorship or authoritarian country of their choice. Freedom implicates a battle of ideas. Bigoted or unsupported opinions, in time, go to the bottom. I can see outlawing speech which directly and immediately advocates violence or creates danger, such as falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. I can see preventing the pre-publication of troop movements. Other than that, if someone wants to make foolish statements, let them. I am just as outraged by the action of my fellow Jews in stifling an anti-Jewish website in BC (link to article, excerpts below): Arthur Topham of Radical Press charged with promoting hatred of Jews The publisher of a British Columbia website that has drawn repeated complaints over its portrayals of Jews has been charged with promoting hatred following a six-month police investigation, officials said Tuesday. Arthur Topham, 65, was charged with a single count of willfully promoting hatred against “people of the Jewish religion or ethnic group” as well as improper storage of firearms found in his house near Quesnel, B.C. ******************** “We’re glad that the government and the police have taken our concerns seriously and proceeded,” said Anita Bromberg of B’nai Brith Canada, which had asked police to investigate the website last May. I found both attacks on freedom, and abhorrent. Edited January 30, 2014 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
cybercoma Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 This has implications for the content here. I remember when there was a media blackout on a particular situation back in the day, Greg was charged with being acutely vigilant about content in regards to that topic. If people may be held liable for their comments on message boards and Greg as administrator is personally liable, then this is going to become a whole new game. Quote
jbg Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Posted January 30, 2014 This has implications for the content here. I remember when there was a media blackout on a particular situation back in the day, Greg was charged with being acutely vigilant about content in regards to that topic. If people may be held liable for their comments on message boards and Greg as administrator is personally liable, then this is going to become a whole new game. I hope not. I may even go donate to the cause on funding the appeal. I am deeply troubled by this opinion. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Keepitsimple Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Here's an older article by yep, you got it - Ezra Levant. It dates back to 2008 but that's also when Richard Warman started suing all things Conservative. Here's some excerpts: It’s impossible to criticize section 13 without criticizing Warman, because without Warman, section 13 would have been defunct years ago – almost no-one else in this country of 33 million people uses it. I’d call it “Warman’s Law”, but I’ve already given that title to another law enacted because of Warman. Warman’s Law is a law brought in by the B.C. government specifically to protect libraries from Warman’s nuisance defamation suits. (We should find some way to set up a Warman’s law to protect universities from Warman, too.)Warman doesn’t just “use” section 13. As I’ve documented here before, he actively interferes with other CHRC investigators working on his complaints. For example, he called up Hannya Rizk, a fellow investigator he trained, and told her to improperly withhold information from the person Warman had complained about; he told Rizk to slow down her work to fit his other plans; he tried to get Rizk to improperly disclose confidential information about cases to third parties.And then there’s Warman’s direct interference in the investigation of his own complaints – wandering right into the CHRC offices, hopping right on investigator’s computers, using their passwords, and just having a ball – violating not only privacy and confidentiality, but the integrity of the CHRC’s evidence – not that such sloppiness has detracted from their 100% conviction rate.Warman isn’t solely responsible for the corruption of the CHRC, of course – he couldn’t get away with his antics without the cooperation and even encouragement of the rest of the CHRC staff, which happens to include some decidedly ethically challenged people. But Warman is the central figure in its abuse. That is a source of great pride for Warman, who professes a philosophy he calls “maximum disruption”.The more I learn about Warman, the more I write about him. And, like the CHRC, he hates public exposure. Earlier this year, Warman’s lawyer served me with a lengthy Libel Notice, which I posted to my website here, with my commentary on it here. More Here: http://ezralevant.com/2008/04/richard-warman-has-sued-me-and.html Quote Back to Basics
waldo Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 This has implications for the content here. I remember when there was a media blackout on a particular situation back in the day, Greg was charged with being acutely vigilant about content in regards to that topic. If people may be held liable for their comments on message boards and Greg as administrator is personally liable, then this is going to become a whole new game. doesn't, as stated, "41 defamatory statements targeted towards one individual"... in a "malicious, high-handed and oppressive" manner, rise above a simple case of generalized 'lax/missing forum moderation'? Was the decision to close the board a response to the libel ruling and attached costs, or a concern over a possible contempt charge should a repeat of one of the same 41 defamations occur? per the Ottawa Citizen: In a recently released decision, Ontario Superior Court Justice Robert Smith granted Warman a permanent injunction that prohibits Free Dominion from ever repeating “in any manner whatsoever” any of the 41 defamations. The jury found that the four defendants — Roger Smith, Jason Bertucci, Connie and Mark Fournier — had been “malicious, high-handed and oppressive” in their conduct. Justice Smith also found the defendants had acted unreasonably by refusing to accept Warman’s offer to settle the case for $5,000 each. Quote
jacee Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) January 22, 2014 was a sad day for Canada and Canada's freedoms. I was a poster at Freedomininion.ca from March 12, 2004 to June 26, 2006 when I was banned. I was banned for reasons that are not important here. Over the years I made many friends at FD with whom I still keep in contact. THat is not the reason for my sadness though. Freedominion was just shut down as a result of a judgment of an Ontario court (link to article, excerpts below): Conservative website shuttered after libel ruling OTTAWA The online political forum, Free Dominion, has shut down after a wholesale defeat in a libel case brought by Ottawa human rights lawyer Richard Warman. A jury concluded that Warman was maliciously defamed by four commentators on Free Dominion, a website that bills itself as the voice of principled conservatism. Freedom of speech is a great concept in theory and in practice. Fools quickly expose themselves and ideas of merit rise. Freedom is not for the coward or the feint of heart. Those can take shelter, quite easily, in the legal equivalent of their mother's womb, in a dictatorship or authoritarian country of their choice. Freedom implicates a battle of ideas. Bigoted or unsupported opinions, in time, go to the bottom. I can see outlawing speech which directly and immediately advocates violence or creates danger, such as falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. I can see preventing the pre-publication of troop movements. Other than that, if someone wants to make foolish statements, let them. Those are some of the types of 'free speech' that are criminal offences. Conspiracy to commit crimes is another. Defamation of character (libel, slander) is another. This has always been true. No one can claim they didn't know it was a crime.And more importantly, no one at FD intervened to remedy the situation or to try to prevent further occurences of defamation crimes on their board.If they had, they wouldn't be in this situation today. The Fourniers have never apologized or issued a retraction about the statements found to be defamatory. Their choice, their loss. I found both attacks on freedom, and abhorrent.That's ridiculous.We never had the 'freedom' to commit defamation crimes, nor should we. . I am quite certain that moderators here would take action, and would not be at risk. Edited January 30, 2014 by jacee Quote
waldo Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 I hope not. I may even go donate to the cause on funding the appeal. I am deeply troubled by this opinion. a claimed American deeply troubled by the closing of a smallish, fringe Canadian discussion forum? Really? in any case, defamation is not... free speech! Quote
jbg Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) a claimed American deeply troubled by the closing of a smallish, fringe Canadian discussion forum? Really? in any case, defamation is not... free speech! In what way am I a "claimed" American? I was born in New York City to two American Jewish parents in 1957, lived within 40 kms of New York City for all but September 1975 to May 1982, my college and law school years. Even in New York City for about 14 of those years. So, In what way am I a "claimed" American?in any case, defamation is not... free speech!In my mind free speech is the right not to stand at trial for the contents of a statement. Edited January 30, 2014 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
BubberMiley Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Really?No, sarcastically. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) Hold up folks....is "defamation" (libel and slander) a crime in Canada, or just a civil tort ? No matter, America and Americans will stand by Canada and MLW with continued site hosting, forum engine, web browsers, operating systems, and all manner of interesting American content to be discussed for years to come. Forward...together !! (With the NSA too, of course.) Edited January 30, 2014 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 In what way am I a "claimed" American? In my mind free speech is the right not to stand at trial for the contents of a statement. are you... deeply troubled by my use of the word claimed? I claim to be Canadian... you claim to be an American. Would you like a dictionary link? and no - one does not get to equate defamation with your "a sad day for Canada and Freedom"... to equate defamation with an infringement on free speech. directly from Richard Warman: Richard Warman v. Connie Fournier, Mark Fournier, Roger Smith, Jason Bertucci – Following on the jury verdict in October upholding my claim for libel against the defendants, Justice Smith of the Ontario Superior Court has now issued a permanent injunction and costs award on a solicitor-client basis in the amount of $85,000. Click here to read the 7-page decision for yourself. I note that Justice Smith upheld the jury’s awarding of aggravated and punitive damages on the basis that there was ample evidence of malice on the part of the defendants to justify this. People who read the order linked above will be able to separate fact from fiction about this case. Overall, I think it’s not unreasonable to take the following points from this: i. if you make a mistake, admit it, repair the harm, and move on (one defendant had the grace to do this from the beginning) ii. don’t ally yourself with people who are likely to do you more harm than good (whether unintentionally or otherwise) iii. if you can’t prove an allegation, don’t pretend to yourself or others that you can iv. if someone offers you an olive branch, think twice before striking it away or trying to set it on fire. Quote
guyser Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 In my mind free speech is the right not to stand at trial for the contents of a statement. So , as a lawyer you are against all libel and slander cases? Quote
jbg Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) So , as a lawyer you are against all libel and slander cases? I follow the dictates of New York Times v. Sullivan which held that a public figure must show 'actual malice' in order to prevail on such a claim. As a practical matter I am against all such actions though as a theoretical matter there are some that may pass muster. I suppose if someone posted, with no foundation, that some non-public individual had performed an abominable act with their dog there should be a case. But why would anyone do that? Edited January 30, 2014 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Michael Hardner Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Let's all snack on this awhile before we return to this thread: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_defamation_law I intend to. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Let's all snack on this awhile before we return to this thread: Why can't we do both ? I remember one bizarre 8mm film loop in college that we charged freshmen 25 cents to see, and it involved an "abominable act" with a dog and a well known movie "star"? So no defamation case, right ? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
BubberMiley Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 But why would anyone do that?Lonesome, I guess. Maybe it was a good-looking dog. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Lonesome, I guess. Maybe it was a good-looking dog. IIRC, it was a cocker-spaniel. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Michael Hardner Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Why can't we do both ? From the Wikipedia page: For all the lofty quotes about free speech in Canadian jurisprudence, the reality is that our libel laws are the least protective of free speech in the English-speaking world. I need to understand the basics before I read forward. It will help me separate the wheat from the chaff in the posts I am about to read. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 I need to understand the basics before I read forward. It will help me separate the wheat from the chaff in the posts I am about to read. That's why I asked if defamation was a criminal offense. With Canadian hate speech laws and publication bans, nothing would surprise me anymore. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Michael Hardner Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 That's why I asked if defamation was a criminal offense. With Canadian hate speech laws and publication bans, nothing would surprise me anymore. Yes, follow the link to find out some amazing and unfortunate facts about our feudal legal system. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Yes, follow the link to find out some amazing and unfortunate facts about our feudal legal system. OK.....thanks for the link. That article is a bit biased and as I often opine, burdened with too much American comparisons / spin. Still, scary stuff if factual. Good thing this site is hosted in Texas ! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
overthere Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Sad day indeed. I occasionally posted there, and recently posted there. Sorry to see Warman get any positive press, if indeed this is positive. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
jacee Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 In my mind free speech is the right not to stand at trial for the contents of a statement.Except for statements that are crimes, I assume?Like ... conspiracy treason defamation and such ... I assume? Your statement doesn't hold up. Quote
waldo Posted January 30, 2014 Report Posted January 30, 2014 Yes, follow the link to find out some amazing and unfortunate facts about our feudal legal system. civil... and criminal: from the Criminal Code of Canada: - 298. Definition (1) A defamatory libel is matter published, without lawful justification or excuse, that is likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that is designed to insult the person of or concerning whom it is published. Mode of expression (2) A defamatory libel may be expressed directly or by insinuation or irony a - in words legibly marked on any substance; or b - by any object signifying a defamatory libel otherwise than by words. - 300. Punishment of libel known to be false Every one who publishes a defamatory libel that he knows is false is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. - 301. Punishment for defamatory libel Every one who publishes a defamatory libel is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.