What can be done?
By Ezra Levant on January 16, 2008 7:29 PM
Comments on Ezra Levant’s article by
Arthur Topham
The Radical Press
January 18, 2008
Re: these comments were posted on Ezra Levant’s site at: http://www.ezralevant.com
Dear Ezra,
Greetings from another Canadian publisher who is also battling against the Beast that you refer to in your article, ‘What can be done?’. As a fellow recipient of a complaint registered against both myself and my website http://www.radicalpress.com with the Canadian Human Rights Commission and received on November 20th, 2007 I would have to submit that my case is probably the latest in a rather long list of individuals and organizations and publications who have come under attack by these quasi-judicial body.
As you have asked for advice regarding this matter I thought it appropriate to proffer some from what I have gleaned over the past years of study and research that relates to this issue. There are some basic differences between your case Ezra and many of the others who have been either harassed, intimidated, fined, silenced or jailed due to the decisions of this politically-motivated body of censors. These will become obvious as run through your article but for the moment let us look at your recommendations for dismantling this quasi-infrastructure that tends toward tyranny rather than openness and trust.
You are absolutely correct in saying that there is an urgent need to alert the general public to the misconceptions that the vast majority of Canadians are suffering under when they think of Human Rights Commissions. They have, as you so poignantly state, become a sword rather than a shield to protect those within our society who are treated unjustly. Where you and I might disagree is in recognizing who is wielding that sword and why they are thus motivated to do so.
You state, truthfully, that these commissions aren’t ‘normal’; that it is ‘not normal to haul publishers before the government to ask them about their political thoughts. It’s not normal for a secular state to enforce a radical Muslim fatwa against cartoons.’ I could not concur more fully with this perception. They are, in fact, abnormal and, like abnormal cells within a body, inherently a danger to the organism as a whole, in this case Canadian society in general. The business of government is to ensure that the free flow of ideas continues uninterrupted, for it is within such a process that governments evolve into greater and greater egalitarian entities thus both preserving our sacred, democratic ideals and rights and ensuring greater justice for all Canadian citizens.
I also find myself agreeing with your assessment of these HRCs as being counterfeit and casting false shadows of genuine authority and legitimacy that ultimately will end up maligning Canada’s judicial integrity; one I might add, that is already in a precarious position for many Canadians.
What you refer to as ‘denormalizing’ I would prefer to term ‘debriefing’ because it is my contention that these commissions were set up specifically for partisan purposes; ones which the Canadian public needs to understand in much greater detail in order to fully realize why they were created. All the details regarding this position are outlined in detail in my own ‘‘Response’ to the CHRC which I submitted to them on January 3, 2008. The complete text of this Response can be viewed on my website at http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=629
Again, you rightly state that most Canadians have never heard of these ‘human rights commissions’ but I would suggest that there are specific reasons why this is so and why these undemocratic, draconian, ‘Star Chamber’ entities perform their ‘show trials’ in secret and beyond the pale of the press. You use the example of the ‘German Democratic Republic’ which you say, ‘was neither Democratic nor a Republic’. I, in turn, would choose another country and say the Democratic State of Israel, which is not a democracy but in reality an apartheid, racist, totalitarian state. Like you say, it sounds good to state that it is a democracy like Canada and the USA and elsewhere but when the mask of media propaganda is removed the real face presents a rather stark and differing countenance than what our mainstream media intentionally portray.
With respect to the blogosphere or the Internet again you are bang on the money in terms of the immediacy of information transferal. This is what makes the net an anarchistic medium free of any centralized control and what ensures that each and every person’s perspective is guaranteed a hearing if they are capable of procuring a computer and a ISP. The www is the ultimate form of democracy in terms of freedom of speech. But it also presents a clear and present danger to the vested interests who now own and control the older forms of communication i.e. the printing presses, radio and television and it is these institutions that are now clearly feeling challenged by the free access of opinion and information.
You mention that your YouTube videos have been viewed by 320,000 people thus far. In my own case I did not have video material to assist me but nonetheless I still had my keyboard and access to some of the largest alternative news outlets on the web today. Prior to sending my Response to the CHRC I made the decision to not go the route that Neville Chamberlain did with Hitler and try to appease the censors but instead chose to send my thoughts and defense to the millions of readers who inhabit the Cyberian landscape known as the Internet. In this way I knew that my position with respect to these clandestine and dangerous entities would be exposed beforehand. When Rense.com and WhatReallyHappened.com and Ziopedia.com ran my article, KILLING THE HUNDREDTH MONKEY: The Battle for Control and Censorship of Canada’s Internet by the B’nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress, http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=628 within hours millions of readers had access to the contents of my Response to the CHRC. That, I suggest, is a form of immediate redress and justice which one will not find in any similar quarter within the bureaucracy of Ottawa or the offices of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and their illegal and unjust Tribunal system. Obviously it doesn’t guarantee a fair hearing in the matter (considering the parameters within which these commissions operate) but it does alert the public to the manner in which the commissions function and that is a first step in the debriefing process that is necessary in order to implement the requisite changes.
You go on to highlight two central qualities of these commissions. First off they erode values such as ‘freedom of speech, freedom of religion and diversity of opinion’ which you contend is their mission. You further state that this is ‘unCanadian’. I would go one step beyond that and say that such a purpose is undemocratic, unconstitutional, totalitarian and fascist and inimical to everything that Canadians both fought and died for and value as supreme in their lives.
Your second point about ‘fairness’ is concomitant with your first and needs no further explanation.
You then go on to discuss how you have posted some of the more egregious examples of decisions these commissions have come to, especially in Alberta, and also make mention of the many complaints under the ‘hate’ section contained in Sec. 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act. That is the section under which my complainant Harvey Smarba, B.C. representative for the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada has submitted his spurious contention that I am spreading ‘hatred toward Jews and citizens of Israel’ via my website.
Your mention of Ricardo Warmouse is most appropriate under these circumstances and I am surprised that in this regard you haven’t made mention of the very recent decision in the Warmouse v. Lemire case which occurred on January 15th of this year. The most dramatic disclosure and the one most damning to the CHRC itself was, as Marc Lemire states in his Press Release, ‘the admission by Dean Steacy, the chief internet investigator for the CHRC [that he] tried to entrap me in 2006 on Stormfront using the alias ‘Jadewarr’. This means that EVERY single party against me (on the Merits of the case) at one point tried to entrap me. Ricardo Warmouse using the alias ‘Pogue Mahone’ tried to get me to say stuff about him and attempted to engage in me conversations on Stormfront. I smelled a rat immediately, and I wrote ‘who is this, Terry Wilson or Ricardo Warmouse?’ Boy did I have foresight! It was indeed Ricardo Warmouse. With the retaliation provisions of the CHRA, getting me to say stuff could have meant huge fines.’ The details of this federal case can be found at http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/jan18-08_FreeDominion_and_CHRC.html
All things considered Ezra your goal to rid the nation of these Soviet-style ‘commissions’ is most laudable indeed. While Prime Minister Stephen Harper did refer to these HRCs as totalitarian he did so prior to becoming the Prime Minister and it is still uncertain as to whether or not his thoughts on this matter are the same as before. There are serious backers and lobbying agencies within the federal government who have strong, vested interests in maintaining these commissions as they tend to act as watchdogs for government policies, especially foreign policy.
As for your ‘to-do’ list for legislators, while you may think it is possible (and I kind of doubt that you do) to people these commissariats with unbiased individuals who wouldn’t be tempted to exploit them for political purposes I don’t think it would work. The nature of the Beast itself precludes it functioning in any non-political fashion.
Your point 3 ‘Introduce an amendment to the human rights acts to protect freedom of speech and thought’ is worthy of consideration but I’m not convinced that all the media would favour such a proposition. Much of Canada’s mainstream media is already riddled with major bias due to the monopoly situation under which our media currently operates and were such freedoms protected it would mean that the general public would now feel much more assured in openly advocating for greater accountability in this area and that is something the mainstream monopoly does not want to deal with. I fully agree that the public would want it and they do expect it regardless of what now exists.
Point 4 regarding the Tribunals again calls for greater debate. We can’t afford, in these times of rapid changes and imminent danger from every quarter, to take intermediate steps when it comes to freedom of speech. We either must claim it and stand by it or else continue to be victimized by unaccountable partisans. Respecting this I thought it rather amusing that you said it wasn’t just ‘pruning’ but ‘digging it out by its roots’. The motto of my former newspaper and my current online website is, ‘Digging to the root of the issues’. Seems our convictions intersect at this point.
Point 5 (Abolish both the commission and the tribunal) is of course the only sensible and realistic solution to the unsavory problems that these censors pose. Whether it’s Christians expressing their views on homosexuals and same-sex marriage, or Jewish publishers publishing cartoons that Muslims find offensive, or, as in my case, non-Jewish news networks and writers criticizing the ideological underpinnings of Jewish-created Political Zionism and its effects upon the Israeli state and the Palestinian people, all of these issues are part and parcel of living in an open society which values the ideas and opinions of all of its members. As the infamous American writer and social critic Edward Abbey put it, ‘The best cure for the ills of democracy is more democracy’.
I would end my free advice to you on this issue by saying that in my own experience, receiving the amazing support which I have since publishing my Response on the net, not only from Canadians but from people around the world, by far the vast majority of people do not want or need these guardians of political correctness and prefer freedom over repression.
Good luck in your continuing adventures Ezra.
Arthur Topham
The Radical Press
Canada’s Radical News Network
[email protected]
‘Digging to the root of the issues since 1998″
I would also like to add a plug here with respect to my financial situation. I’m still unable to work steady due to the amount of time and energy required to deal with this matter. Donations have been coming to me and I’m feeling rather awed and humbled by people’s generosity. Unfortunately I’m still very much under the gun in this respect so if it is possibly please send either a M.O. or a Cheque or Cash to:
The Radical Press
4633 Barkerville Hwy
Quesnel, B.C. V2J 6T8
If you include your email address I will contact you to let you know I received your mail and also be able to thank you personally.
Arthur Topham
Radical Press