Friday, February 01, 2008

M-446: Kinsella not a big fan

Warren Kinsella in an Open Letter to the Liberal Party of Canada regarding MP Keith Martin's motion (Post blog):

...Some of us were pretty surprised by Keith Martin's move, he being a Liberal Member of Parliament and all. It didn't seem to be particularly consistent with past Liberal "values" or positions. So, what say you, Messrs. Dion, Ignatieff, Rae et al.? Do you agree with this bald-faced move to gut human rights legislation, by one of your supposed human rights experts?...

(Note the use of the royal "we" further down in the article. Ahem, ahem)

* * * *
Update: This will make Warren happy! - BCLSB - Liberal Party speaks out on Keith Martin.

Lorne Gunter - The right to be loathsome.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

slow day for Warren I guess.

next topic............

Just being honest said...

So I guess if you hold an opinion Warren doesn't agree with, you're automatically demoted to a "so-called" expert. Funny how that works.

Anonymous said...

I just got Angus Reid polled...lots of questions about two new CBC programs

one called Documentary Channel - oh, terrific, I can hardly wait for the
"truth" of those CBC documentaries 24/7.

and another adult drama called "Bold"

then questions about voting preferences in the last two elections.

Any one else get one of these?

Anonymous said...

Is he waiting for the 3 Blind mice to actually respond?
Interesting too that he addresses the 3 of them . Dion really is NOT a leader...he is 1/3 of a leader!

liberal supporter said...

The section (13) they talk of repealing is here.

I'm having trouble parsing what the legalese means. It seems they are only targeting bloggers, mailing lists, and possibly even emails. I think telemarketers or autodialers would be covered here too.

Note (2) under section 13 appears to exempt broadcasters! Maybe they presume broadcasters are covered by CRTC or other regulation. So I don't see how it even applies to Ezra's newspaper. Maybe his online version though. I thought the complaint was about his newspaper. I does suck though, I know some of you guys hate the CBC, you'd think it would be fair game to make a human rights complaint against the CBC for inciting hatred against conservatives. (I don't think they are, but you should have the right to go after them).

It is note (3) of section 13 that I had to read several times. It appears to exempt ISPs from being charged for simply being the carrier for someone else's hate speech.

Would repealing this section mean that I can sue SDA's internet hosting service for all the hate that SDA is propagating (assuming I could prove SDA is doing that, which I cannot prove of course).

It could be that this section prevents more usual Criminal Code hate provisions from applying to the internet. If so, could repealing it mean that suing SDA's ISP becomes possible?

liberal supporter said...

I does suck though
s/b It does suck though.
I misspoke! Don't make me sue myself!

liberal supporter said...

I just got Angus Reid polled...lots of questions about two new CBC programs one called Documentary Channel - oh, terrific, I can hardly wait for the "truth" of those CBC documentaries 24/7. and another adult drama called "Bold"

then questions about voting preferences in the last two elections.


Ha ha, I've never been polled in my life. Do they really do that? It sounds like buying several other products at the same time as buying condoms, or buying three other magazines along with the Playboy...

rabbit said...

I guess Keith Martin looked up the word "liberal" on wikipedia and found this...

a broad array of related ideas and theories of government that consider individual liberty to be the most important political goal. Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. Different forms of liberalism ... are generally united by their support for a number of principles, including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments...

So what definition of "liberal" is Warren Kinsella using?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Kinsella has an update on his own blog. I don't particularly want to provide a link for various reasons, but he's again wondering why the silence from the rest of the LPC.

Anonymous said...

Its the only thing a liberal has done right in years and warnout cantsellit is against it .

rabbit said...

I see Kinsalla posted the following on his site...

So there you go, Messrs. Dion, Ignatieff and Rae: it wasn't a mistake. It is deliberate. Now, what do you plan to do about it?

Kinsella appears unaware that Ignatieff, in his book "The Rights Revolution", came out against hate speech laws. It will be interesting to see if Ignateiff's position stands up in the current storm.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Kinsella appears unaware that Ignatieff, in his book "The Rights Revolution", came out against hate speech laws.

Interesting...

Anonymous said...

Interesting too that Kinsella is 'reacting'...and MSM is ignoring.
Correct me if I'm wrong. Have any media carried the Martin motion story?

Greg said...

The further left part of the liberal party are in my opinion, not liberals, but rather, socialists, and even marxists (Trudeau)who fly a flag of convenience. Classic liberals, would never be associated with the so called hate speech laws, in fact they should be more against it than conservatives. I don't know where not so special K is coming from.

rabbit said...

Greg:

It is a bizarre state of affairs where there are more (classic) liberals who support the CPC than those who support the LPC.

The day Liberals start acting like liberals is the day that trend starts to reverse. However "Harper Derangement Syndrome" seems to have pushed the Liberals even further to the left.

I suspect that classic liberalism / libertarianism is growing both in Canada and the U.S. They are looking for a political home - I wonder what parties will have the wit to provide them with one.

Anonymous said...

CPC has the opportunity right now to speak for libertarinism.Why are they so hesitant?
Gun control, freedom of religion, and fredom of the press are in the forefront.

liberal supporter said...

Classic liberals, would never be associated with the so called hate speech laws, in fact they should be more against it than conservatives.
I think they are interpreting "individual liberty" as including freedom from being marginalized solely based on your ancestry (religion for most people is essentially handed down from ancestors as well).

Whether using the clumsy bludgeon of the law is the best way is certainly debatable.

Even Warren sees the Ezra case as a farce. Is repealing the law the only solution? I think Ezra should get his costs covered when they decide he was making fair comment.

How do we ensure nuisance cases like Ezra's do not proceed, especially against those with fewer resources to defend themselves?

But at the same time, how do we ensure we do not receive mass emails about the verdammt juden must die in our daily spam pile?

Möbius said...

But at the same time, how do we ensure we do not receive mass emails about the verdammt juden must die in our daily spam pile?

I think we can handle it. I'm able to ignore several emails per day re: Viagra substitutes, and my inadequacy to please women. Or men, for that matter.

"Juden" should be capitalized, by the way.

Danke Schoen.

arctic_front said...

I think the so-called 'white majority' is so busy falling all over ourselves trying to look like we are not racists and bigots that we completely forget that the same people we try so hard not to offend, are in fact much bigger racists than we ever were even in our darkest days of the past. We should be targeting those of minority persuasion that 'they too' need give up their racist and bigoted ideas as well.

I'm referring to the Blacks, muslims and natives, et al, that wish us ill-will with their every breath. Trust me.... they exist in very large numbers and are much more overt in showing it. Don't believe me?.. go to a house party on any given evening that is on a native reserve, or Jane and Finch. Us white crackers would be lucky to escape with our lives.

I'm not suggesting that every minority person behaves or thinks like that, but a surprising number are very openly hostile to white-folks, or THE MAN.

Look around....you'll see it everywhere. I think discrimination based on race, gender or religion is bad. But discrimination is also a two-way street.

And all you apologists out there....save your breath, I've heard all the lame excuses attempting to justify racism and bigotry when it comes from minorities towards white's. If racism is wrong.....then it's always wrong, no matter the source. Deal with reality for a change instead of living in a multicultural acid-trip fantasy.