Court ruling a victory for opponents of hate speech

[jacee]

5 hours ago, cannuck said:

I will agree that Johnston is a little off the deep end, but let's take a look at the rest of your post.

How is recording prayer "terrorizing" anyone?   Did he lock them in a closet and threaten them with harm if they didn't say what he wanted?  Where was the "threat"? (In fairness, I have no knowledge of the actual incident, and am posting in fleeting hotel stops flitting from country to country - so feel free to summarize).

I have spent many years travelling and working in the Levant and MENA, and have a large number of friends within Islam.  I am very familiar with what "they" (moderates and fundamentalists) think, say and teach about the West, infidels and particularly Jews.  I can understand why people are offended by Johnston and Banerjee, but I am totally bemused and baffled how the politically correct from the left choose to ignore the matching hate speech, teachings, preachings and activities (such as those that radicalize extremists and fund terrorists from within our borders) and worse yet codify and criminalize what those who oppose such things have to say - giving a pass and even giving credibility to those who propose to destroy the (largely and generally Christian) values that Canadians have come to accept since the founding of the country.

Muslims are NOT getting the "same treatment under the law", they are getting laws made to accommodate them within OUR culture and OUR country.

As a footnote, I am not Christian, Jewish nor Muslim - I do not believe in ANY organized religion of any kind - and feel they are all a fundamental flaw of the human condition.
"

Well if you don't see the problem with Johnston paying racist creeps to sneak into an elementary school and surreptitiously make recordings of young children ... you've got a serious problem, bud. You think unwelcome strangers infiltrating schools to harass young children is ok? ... because they are Muslim, that's ok? Would you expect principals, teachers, parents or school board or police to accept that as a necessary 'freedom' in Canada? What Canadian community do you live in where that is acceptable? 

Secondly, we've had a couple of extremist Muslim clerics visiting Canada who mouthed off about "infidels" ... and were promptly escorted out of the country and disavowed by Muslim communities here. The extremist attitudes you speak of are not accepted here, so lets just deal with our own context and stop attempting to incite and willfully promote hatred. Hmm?! 

The Muslim-Jewish issue is currently about Israeli aggression, invasion, oppression and occasional mass murder of Palestinians. You don't have to be religious to be a Zionist ... or a bigot.

Point being ... keep your comments to the Canadian context please. We don't have those problems. What we do have are hater trolls who (are paid to?) attempt to incite hatred against all Muslims, and some dumb hater flunkies who get sucked in by them. 

So again, keep your comments to the Canadian context please.

And in that context ... Yes in Canada we do make laws to protect minorities who are subject to discrimination and hateful attacks. (Love it or leave it!)

However, the case addressed in this thread is about a defamation lawsuit, and the preliminary court ruling that hate speech is not protected as 'free speech'. 

You got a problem with that?

Edited June 25, 2018 by jacee

[Argus]

45 minutes ago, jacee said:

The Muslim-Jewish issue is currently about Israeli aggression, invasion, oppression and occasional mass murder of Palestinians. You don't have to be religious to be a Zionist ... or a bigot.

Drivel. The Muslim issue with Jews began with the Koran and the Hadiths. It has nothing to do with Palestine, which is merely a convenient stalking horse. Muslim's are outraged at oppression and killing in Palestine? Yet every single Muslim nation is more oppressive towards its own people than Israel is, practices torture and executions, and periodically engages in slaughter such as we see in Iraq, Yemen and Syria without their fellow Muslims showing any concern. So pardon me if I'm not taken in by their crocodile tears for Palestinians.

[taxme]

14 hours ago, jacee said:

Muslims are getting the same treatment under the law as everyone else. Some people don't like that equality under the law. Love it or leave it! 

Creepy Kevin Johnston offered a reward for creepy people to terrorize children by sneaking into a school and recording children's Muslim prayers. The school board was not amused and he's facing hate crime charges. He's not a "patriot". He's just a pathetic creepy hatemonger.  'Patriots' don't threaten children. 

It would be quite interesting to know as to what words are being said in those prayers? Maybe they are saying words like all infidels should all be knocked off because that is what they believe in that if you are not an Islamic Muslim than you are an infidel and should be put to death. And many Imams have been found out to be saying just that. Even in London Muslims were observed parading with signs saying death to the infidels. They all should be put to death. Tommy Robinson can fill you in on what Muslims think about you and me the infidels. 

"Creepy Kevin Johnston" has found out that Imams have and still are preaching hatred towards anyone who is not a Muslim in their prayers towards grownups and children. We need to have more people sneaking into their prayer rooms in schools and mosques to really get to hear as to what they are saying. I don't see where Johnston is a hatemonger. I see him as a Canadian patriot. And where is Johnston threatening children anyway? Is this just more liberal lies that we all have to live with every day here in Canada? Just asking. 

[taxme]

5 hours ago, jacee said:

Well if you don't see the problem with Johnston paying racist creeps to sneak into an elementary school and surreptitiously make recordings of young children ... you've got a serious problem, bud. You think unwelcome strangers infiltrating schools to harass young children is ok? ... because they are Muslim, that's ok? Would you expect principals, teachers, parents or school board or police to accept that as a necessary 'freedom' in Canada? What Canadian community do you live in where that is acceptable? 

Secondly, we've had a couple of extremist Muslim clerics visiting Canada who mouthed off about "infidels" ... and were promptly escorted out of the country and disavowed by Muslim communities here. The extremist attitudes you speak of are not accepted here, so lets just deal with our own context and stop attempting to incite and willfully promote hatred. Hmm?! 

The Muslim-Jewish issue is currently about Israeli aggression, invasion, oppression and occasional mass murder of Palestinians. You don't have to be religious to be a Zionist ... or a bigot.

Point being ... keep your comments to the Canadian context please. We don't have those problems. What we do have are hater trolls who (are paid to?) attempt to incite hatred against all Muslims, and some dumb hater flunkies who get sucked in by them. 

So again, keep your comments to the Canadian context please.

And in that context ... Yes in Canada we do make laws to protect minorities who are subject to discrimination and hateful attacks. (Love it or leave it!)

However, the case addressed in this thread is about a defamation lawsuit, and the preliminary court ruling that hate speech is not protected as 'free speech'. 

You got a problem with that?

I have a problem with anyone being charged with a hate crime when someone is expressing their right to their opinion and points of view even if it does appear to some people to appear be hatred of some sort. Where is Johnston promoting any kind of hatred or violence towards anyone? I never see it. Kevin Johnston is only being harassed because he is pointing out and telling it like it is and that goes against political correctness. As far as I can see Johnston has done nothing wrong except maybe hurt someone sensitive feelings. Why and when did  hurting someones feelings has now become a terrible crime in Canada? Can I now be able to have the right to have someone now charged for hurting my feelings also? What is going on in this country that we have gone this far that hurting someone's feelings has now become a major crime? And then one member wonders why I am starting to lose my loyalty to Canada. I never asked that I wanted to live in a communist country. It's no wonder that with all the liberals, red Tories, communists and socialists running this country we are well on our way to becoming a Stalinist communist country. My opinion of course. 

[dialamah]

23 minutes ago, taxme said:

They all should be put to death

How are you different from Imams who call for Jews to be put to death?

Hate speech is hate speech, even when its a White "Nationalist" calling for the death of Muslims.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, dialamah said:

How are you different from Imams who call for Jews to be put to death?

Hate speech is hate speech, even when its a White "Nationalist" calling for the death of Muslims.

He's no different, except in the influence he might have over others.

[taxme]

19 minutes ago, dialamah said:

How are you different from Imams who call for Jews to be put to death?

Hate speech is hate speech, even when its a White "Nationalist" calling for the death of Muslims.

The difference is that I have never called for Jews to be put to death. If I did you will have to show me verbatim as to where I have said this? Can you? I doubt it. You are all talk. 

You are promoting hate speech right now by trying to make things appear as though all white nationalists are hatemongers. I have never called for the death of Muslims. Again show me verbatim where I have said this? My sensitive feelings are hurt now and I want you charged with a hate crime. Where is the Human Rights Communist Commission when you need them. No doubt all hiding in the HRCC closet now. LOL. 

[taxme]

30 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

He's no different, except in the influence he might have over others.

And what about all your efforts in trying to influence and impose your way thinking on others? I bet you never gave much thought to that, hey?  

[dialamah]

25 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

He's no different, except in the influence he might have over others.

People have influenced him, he influences others and the "movement" spreads.  Canada is still pretty safe for Jews, Muslims, Catholics and Blacks, but reports of religious and ethnically motivated crime are up, so I wouldn't agree that the hate he constantly tries to spread is irrelevant.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

People have influenced him, he influences others and the "movement" spreads.  Canada is still pretty safe for Jews, Muslims, Catholics and Blacks, but reports of religious and ethnically motivated crime are up, so I wouldn't agree that the hate he constantly tries to spread is irrelevant.

Well if you believe that then you ought to support keeping an eye on whether Muslim imams, who are far more influential, are preaching hate.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

People have influenced him, he influences others and the "movement" spreads.  Canada is still pretty safe for Jews, Muslims, Catholics and Blacks, but reports of religious and ethnically motivated crime are up, so I wouldn't agree that the hate he constantly tries to spread is irrelevant.

Sure, but unless he's a preacher reaching a congregation, I would say it is somewhat less relevant than that spread by someone with those attributes.

 

[jacee]

3 hours ago, taxme said:

 

You are ... trying to make things appear as though all white nationalists are hatemongers. 

Unh ... yup they are, kinda by definition. Lol

 

Edited June 26, 2018 by jacee

[cannuck]

10 hours ago, jacee said:

Well if you don't see the problem with Johnston paying racist creeps to sneak into an elementary school and surreptitiously make recordings of young children ... you've got a serious problem, bud. You think unwelcome strangers infiltrating schools to harass young children is ok? ... because they are Muslim, that's ok? Would you expect principals, teachers, parents or school board or police to accept that as a necessary 'freedom' in Canada? What Canadian community do you live in where that is acceptable? 

Secondly, we've had a couple of extremist Muslim clerics visiting Canada who mouthed off about "infidels" ... and were promptly escorted out of the country and disavowed by Muslim communities here. The extremist attitudes you speak of are not accepted here, so lets just deal with our own context and stop attempting to incite and willfully promote hatred. Hmm?! 

The Muslim-Jewish issue is currently about Israeli aggression, invasion, oppression and occasional mass murder of Palestinians. You don't have to be religious to be a Zionist ... or a bigot.

Point being ... keep your comments to the Canadian context please. We don't have those problems. What we do have are hater trolls who (are paid to?) attempt to incite hatred against all Muslims, and some dumb hater flunkies who get sucked in by them. 

So again, keep your comments to the Canadian context please.

And in that context ... Yes in Canada we do make laws to protect minorities who are subject to discrimination and hateful attacks. (Love it or leave it!)

However, the case addressed in this thread is about a defamation lawsuit, and the preliminary court ruling that hate speech is not protected as 'free speech'. 

You got a problem with that?

I have a problem with nothing but pure bullshit.

I asked, you did not answer:  were the children threatened with harm in any way in obtaining these recordings?   Without that, I can see no "terrorizing" taking place at all.

[jacee]

1 hour ago, cannuck said:

I have a problem with nothing but pure bullshit.

I asked, you did not answer:  were the children threatened with harm in any way in obtaining these recordings?   Without that, I can see no "terrorizing" taking place at all.

I don't know what country you live in 

but in Canada, that's a lock down.

With a police guard.

And hate crime charges.

Edited June 26, 2018 by jacee

[taxme]

18 hours ago, jacee said:

Unh ... yup they are, kinda by definition. Lol

 

Unh. You mean it is more like your left wing liberal definition of what a white nationalist must mean, right?  

[Michael Hardner]

18 hours ago, jacee said:

Unh ... yup they are, kinda by definition. Lol

It is assumed that as racial separatists, they regard 'interbreeding' to be immoral so the end vision necessarily involves telling people that associating with other people is 'wrong'.  I'm sure it doesn't seem like 'hate' to them but hard to see what else it could be.  This actually may be a good test to see if someone is a hatemonger.  What do you think ?

[Argus]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It is assumed that as racial separatists, they regard 'interbreeding' to be immoral so the end vision necessarily involves telling people that associating with other people is 'wrong'.  I'm sure it doesn't seem like 'hate' to them but hard to see what else it could be.  This actually may be a good test to see if someone is a hatemonger.  What do you think ?

Don't the vast majority of people choose spouses and friends from their own racial group? Does this make them hatemongers?

[Michael Hardner]

12 minutes ago, Argus said:

Don't the vast majority of people choose spouses and friends from their own racial group? Does this make them hatemongers?

That's not the same as prohibiting others from interracial association, at the penalty of being shunned.  Why are you making such pablum arguments here ?

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

That's not the same as prohibiting others from interracial association, at the penalty of being shunned.  Why are you making such pablum arguments here ?

To make a point. Most people prefer, either consciously or unconsciously, to be with the same racial group most of the time. They might say anything about it to anyone. But the statistics are fairly clear this is who they choose. So are the white nationalists hatemongers or just responding to their own feelings and then turning that into some sort of political/social argument?

I should add I'm thinking more about emotions and subconscious biases rather than actually speaking out against racial associations or campaigning for a white only homeland.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

48 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) To make a point. Most people prefer, either consciously or unconsciously, to be with the same racial group most of the time.

2) So are the white nationalists hatemongers or just responding to their own feelings and then turning that into some sort of political/social argument?

3) ...campaigning for a white only homeland.

1) Yes, of course.  I don't know that you have much control over whom you're attracted to.

2) I doubt that.  They are "attracted" to extreme authoritarianism and given that they deny reality, I am sure they deny their own feelings of attraction to other races also.

3) The same people who call themselves "conservatives" and want government to butt out of people's affairs want the government to decide who you get to date.  I am not talking about you here, but the idealogues who espouse far-right and conspiracy theories that attend the far right.

[jacee]

On 6/26/2018 at 2:46 PM, Michael Hardner said:

It is assumed that as racial separatists, they regard 'interbreeding' to be immoral so the end vision necessarily involves telling people that associating with other people is 'wrong'.  I'm sure it doesn't seem like 'hate' to them but hard to see what else it could be.  This actually may be a good test to see if someone is a hatemonger.  What do you think ?

To keep perspective:

taxme said: "You are ... trying to make things appear as though all white nationalists are hatemongers."

I said: "yup ... by definition"

And you replied as above.

(It's interesting that taxme hasn't replied to me. Lol )

I've always been curious where on earth 'white nationalists' think they are going to find, or create this fanciful 'white nation'. In the past, I've suggested that they could perhaps colonize a nice big white iceberg in the far north ... but ... global warming  ... oops!

As for attitudes towards intermingling of races ... I guess my attitude is this: Anyone who would reject their child, a sibling or someone else they love, solely because that person loves someone of another race, that's truly a sicko racist pig, imo. 

And anyone who would actively try to impose such restrictions on others, lobby, organize, rally etc on those grounds ... yup, sicko racist pigs imo.

But when I was growing up in rural Canada, 'mixing' Protestants and Catholics was still anomalous and Canada's immigration laws were still thoroughly racist. 

We are only a few decades down the road from that, and many rural Canadians still live in a white monoculture. 

Many people of different races/backgrounds may have mixed feelings about mixing races/cultures ... when it's only hypothetical. But when it becomes reality among their family/friends ... I think people tend to accept, love and defend. 

I think it's hard to put strict criteria on what is a 'racist', because life experience moulds and mellows people. But if you live where there are few to no people of other races, it takes longer.

Even among those who organize and rally with ugly signs and write and yell ugly racist things ... some are predatory sociopathic racists and probably not fixable,  and some are just people in social/financial/psychological distress latching onto something/anything/belonging and falling victim to the sociopathic propaganda.

That's not a simple answer. Lol

But the answer is very clear about where Kevin Johnston stands on the scale of racism: He's a predatory sociopathic racist who thinks he's 'smart' to challenge hate laws by threatening school children. 

And the answer is very clear about Trump too.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, jacee said:

1) I've always been curious where on earth 'white nationalists' think they are going to find, or create this fanciful 'white nation'. In the past, I've suggested that they could perhaps colonize a nice big white iceberg in the far north ... but ... global warming  ... oops!

2) As for attitudes towards intermingling of races ... I guess my attitude is this: Anyone who would reject their child, a sibling or someone else they love, solely because that person loves someone of another race, that's truly a sicko racist pig, imo.  And anyone who would actively try to impose such restrictions on others, lobby, organize, rally etc on those grounds ... yup, sicko racist pigs imo.

3) That's not a simple answer. Lol

1) They seem to think they have a right to some chunk of the US Midwest.  I think they could do well on a floating barge.

2) They could split hairs by saying "We don't hate the ethnics, we just think they are a lower form of human"

3) It takes generations, mostly as we wait for the dinosaurs to croak...

[taxme]

2 hours ago, jacee said:

To keep perspective:

taxme said: "You are ... trying to make things appear as though all white nationalists are hatemongers."

I said: "yup ... by definition"

And you replied as above.

(It's interesting that taxme hasn't replied to me. Lol )

I've always been curious where on earth 'white nationalists' think they are going to find, or create this fanciful 'white nation'. In the past, I've suggested that they could perhaps colonize a nice big white iceberg in the far north ... but ... global warming  ... oops!

As for attitudes towards intermingling of races ... I guess my attitude is this: Anyone who would reject their child, a sibling or someone else they love, solely because that person loves someone of another race, that's truly a sicko racist pig, imo. 

And anyone who would actively try to impose such restrictions on others, lobby, organize, rally etc on those grounds ... yup, sicko racist pigs imo.

But when I was growing up in rural Canada, 'mixing' Protestants and Catholics was still anomalous and Canada's immigration laws were still thoroughly racist. 

We are only a few decades down the road from that, and many rural Canadians still live in a white monoculture. 

Many people of different races/backgrounds may have mixed feelings about mixing races/cultures ... when it's only hypothetical. But when it becomes reality among their family/friends ... I think people tend to accept, love and defend. 

I think it's hard to put strict criteria on what is a 'racist', because life experience moulds and mellows people. But if you live where there are few to no people of other races, it takes longer.

Even among those who organize and rally with ugly signs and write and yell ugly racist things ... some are predatory sociopathic racists and probably not fixable,  and some are just people in social/financial/psychological distress latching onto something/anything/belonging and falling victim to the sociopathic propaganda.

That's not a simple answer. Lol

But the answer is very clear about where Kevin Johnston stands on the scale of racism: He's a predatory sociopathic racist who thinks he's 'smart' to challenge hate laws by threatening school children. 

And the answer is very clear about Trump too.

I can tell you this much. If white people did colonize an iceberg and kept it afloat and from melting and made and are living the good life on an iceberg  the non-whites would be coming enmasse by the millions because from what I have observed over the many years that I have been around is that non-whites prefer to be with whites rather than their own kind. Otherwise, why do the millions of non-whites always keep leaving their own non-white homelands and want to be where and live with white people. They know who they would prefer to be with. 

But hey, if too you and others don't like to hear what I just wrote well too bad for you. Go chop ice somewhere. 

[taxme]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) They seem to think they have a right to some chunk of the US Midwest.  I think they could do well on a floating barge.

2) They could split hairs by saying "We don't hate the ethnics, we just think they are a lower form of human"

3) It takes generations, mostly as we wait for the dinosaurs to croak...

Indeed, I do believe that white people should have a homeland that they can call their own and why not? But the way things are going on these days by the traitors of Canada that dream is not going to happen because those traitors to white Canada have and still are flooding Canada with as many non-white people as they can. This is why Canada will become a third world hell hole one day thanks to those brainless thinking dinosaurs. White people will pay for their stupidity and their grandchildren will pay for that stupidity. The white hatemongers are a plenty in this country. So sad for what was once a great white WASP nation soon to be turned into dinosaur land riding around in/on Flintstones style cars. Way the go, fools. Great job.  

[jacee]

17 minutes ago, taxme said:

I can tell you this much. If white people did colonize an iceberg and kept it afloat and from melting and made and are living the good life on an iceberg  the non-whites would be coming enmasse by the millions because from what I have observed over the many years that I have been around is that non-whites prefer to be with whites rather than their own kind. Otherwise, why do the millions of non-whites always keep leaving their own non-white homelands and want to be where and live with white people. They know who they would prefer to be with. 

But hey, if too you and others don't like to hear what I just wrote well too bad for you. Go chop ice somewhere. 

I think you should try that and see. 

Bon voyage!