Pirate Party Condemns Arrest of Blogger Arthur Topham
Written by Paul Fromm
Wednesday, 13 June 2012 03:44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format.
If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails.
You can read the original version online:
http://ymlp346.net/zQCsuj
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Pirate Party Condemns Arrest of Blogger Arthur Topham

While celebrating Wednesday’s parliamentary vote to repeal the
sections of the controversial “Human Rights Code” (HRC) that
banned the communication of internet messages that could be inferred
as hateful, the Pirate Party of Canada also reminds the nation that it
firmly condemns the arrest of citizen journalist and blogger Arthur
Topham, and the subsequent ban against updating his website or
communicating with his colleagues through e-mail.

While the Pirate Party believes that Topham, noted for his
controversial Radical Press website, holds a number of incorrect and
even offensive positions – we also maintain that Topham, like every
citizen, is protected by Section Two of the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms. Fifteen years ago, we were warned that federal governments
were seeking to erect “guardposts at the frontiers of cyberspace”
to ward off the newly-empowering liberty afforded by the internet, and
the recent arrest of Topham crystallizes that dystopian vision.

The Pirate Party of Canada similarly condemns the police seizure of
computer equipment from Topham’s home in Quesnel, British Columbia-
noting that it was an unnecessary confiscation meant to intimidate an
unpopular writer into silence, rather than to protect Canadians from
any perceived harm.

Party leader Shawn Vulliez stated his party’s stance, clarifying
that the Criminal Code of Canada already has substantial legislation
that prevents the inciting of harm against an individual or group –
and that the HRC simply creates a bizarre world of pseudo-crimes which
are prosecuted through biased individuals without judicial oversight.

“Quite simply”, Vulliez explained, “Topham has not even been
accused of any criminal action, he is accused of writing something on
the internet that offended somebody. If the government can seize your
computer and ban you from going online, because somebody reported that
your non-criminal speech was still tasteless – then it is only a
matter of time until the majority of web users find themselves
suffering the chilling effects of draconian government oversight”.

_____________________________
Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp346.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqgjejgguewwmw
Powered by YourMailingListProvider
 
Pirate Party Condemns Arrest of Blogger Arthur Topham
Written by Paul Fromm
Wednesday, 13 June 2012 03:36
*Pirate Party Condemns Arrest of Blogger Arthur Topham*

While celebrating Wednesday’s parliamentary vote to repeal the sections of
the controversial “Human Rights Code” (HRC) that banned the communication
of internet messages that could be inferred as hateful, the Pirate Party of
Canada also reminds the nation that it firmly condemns the arrest of
citizen journalist and blogger Arthur Topham, and the subsequent ban
against updating his website or communicating with his colleagues through
e-mail.


While the Pirate Party believes that Topham, noted for his controversial
Radical Press website, holds a number of incorrect and even offensive
positions – we also maintain that Topham, like every citizen, is protected
by Section Two of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Fifteen years ago, we
were warned that federal governments were seeking to erect “guardposts at
the frontiers of cyberspace” to ward off the newly-empowering liberty
afforded by the internet, and the recent arrest of Topham crystallizes that
dystopian vision.


The Pirate Party of Canada similarly condemns the police seizure of
computer equipment from Topham’s home in Quesnel, British Columbia- noting
that it was an unnecessary confiscation meant to intimidate an unpopular
writer into silence, rather than to protect Canadians from any perceived
harm.


Party leader Shawn Vulliez stated his party’s stance, clarifying that the
Criminal Code of Canada already has substantial legislation that prevents
the inciting of harm against an individual or group – and that the HRC
simply creates a bizarre world of pseudo-crimes which are prosecuted
through biased individuals without judicial oversight.


“Quite simply”, Vulliez explained, “Topham has not even been accused of any
criminal action, he is accused of writing something on the internet that
offended somebody. If the government can seize your computer and ban you
from going online, because somebody reported that your non-criminal speech
was still tasteless – then it is only a matter of time until the majority
of web users find themselves suffering the chilling effects of draconian
government oversight”.
 
Sec. 13 is Nearly Dead: Commons Gives Third & Final Reading to Bill to Repeal Intern
Written by Paul Fromm
Monday, 11 June 2012 05:51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format.
If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails.
You can read the original version online:
http://ymlp227.net/z63wc9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sec. 13 is Nearly Dead: Commons Gives Third & Final Reading to Bill
to Repeal Internet Censorship

Wednesday, June 6, was a good day for free speech in Canada. The
House of Commons, voting 153-136, gave third and final reading to Bill
C-304,Alberta MP Brian Storseth's private member's bill that will
repeal Sec. 13 (Internet censorship) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Now, it's on to the Senate and likely approval and then Royal assent.
We're advised by one MP that Sec. 13 may be dead by the end of the
Summer. Brian Storseth deserves high marks for his perseverance as do
his caucus colleagues.

However, the real heroes are the many victims of Sec. 13 who fought a
lonely fight before kangaroo court "tribunals" usually ignored when
not being vilified by the complacent press -- people like John Micka,
Glenn Bahr, Melissa Guille, Tom Winnicki, Jason Ouwendyk, Terry
Tremaine, Eldon Warman (a de-taxer and no relative of arch complaint
filer Richard Warman. Special honours go to Marc Lemire for not only
fighting and winning against Richard Warman but also challenging
successfully the constitutionality of Sec. 13. Marc's intrepid lawyer
Barbara Kulazska generated the briefs and paperwork that helped
discredit this evil law. Marc’s long fight helped expose the police
state nature of the CanadianHuman Rights Commission. Who can forget
the Commission's blind (don't ask) "investigator" Dean Steacy
insisting he gives no weight to freedom of speech as "freedom of
speech is an American concept."

Tribute must also go to Doug Christie and the Canadian Free Speech
League who have been steadfast allies against Sec. 13 and, especially
to Doug for his masterful summation December 13, 2011 at the judicial
review of constitutionality of Sec. 13. And modestly, CAFE can share
in the credit. We have represented the unrepresented victims in many a
Sec. 13 tribunal; we have intervened forcefully during Marc Lemire's
long fight and we have helped raise money for the victims.

Sec. 13, one of the two evil tentacles of state censorship of the
Internet, hangs on by just a thread of its putrifying tissue. Still,
it's depressing that only one Liberal (Newfoundland and Labrador MP
Scott Simms) voted for Bill C-304. Postmedia (June 7, 2012) reported:
" 'It's a really important step for freedom of expression in our
country,' Storseth said Thursday, the morning after the bill passed
third and final reading in the House of Commons. There hasn't been a
tremendous pushback as you would have seen seven or eight years ago
when this issue first really arose, and I think it's because there has
been a fruitful debate in our country.'"

Sadly the NDP's Justice critic spouted utter nonsense in opposition
to getting rid of this power of censorship: "Canadian police
departments reported 1,401 hate crimes in 2010, or 4.1 hate crimes per
100,000 population, according to recently released data from
Statistics Canada. New Democrat public-safety critic Randall Garrison
said Wednesday that, due to the large number of hate crimes, the
human-rights commission needs to have the power to combat the issue
online and force individuals and groups to remove websites containing
hateful speech. Removing the sections from the human-rights code will
effectively strip the commission of its power to educate Canadians and
shut down inappropriate websites, he said. 'We do have a serious
problem,' Garrison said. 'If you take away the power to take
(websites) down, it's not clear they have any mandate to even to talk
to people about it and educate them about it.'"
We see with brutal clarity what the game is -- silence critics, have
websites, not just an offending phrase or remark, removed. This was
the demand in the Marc Lemire case, until the defence team revealed
that complainant Richard Warman had posted on the Freedomsite. If ALL
the Freedomsite, even the address, as Warman once contended, was
"hate" then surely Warman's comments under one of his sneaky
pseudonyms on the Freedomsite were "hate" too. The entire removal of
dissident Terry Tremaine's site http://nspcanada.nfshost.com (
http://nspcanada.nfshost.com/ ) is the demand of the Canadian Human
Rights Commission which is hellbent on tossing him in prison for
"contempt." The site contains movies and much material from mainline
sources, including many of Adolf Hitler's speeches. Yet, the demand is
for its total suppression. "Hate crimes," as reported lovingly in
police statistics, are seldom prosecuted and even less frequently
result in a conviction. The puny numbers refers to "reports" rather
than confirmed "crimes" and are mostly graffiti and insults -- really
small potatoes.

With ill grace, some of the leftist bloggers are now spreading the
line that the opponents of Sec. 13 made their lot worse: Someone using
the pseudonym "chapel" wrote on leftist BigCityLiberal's blog, "Those
opposing Sec. 13 bit off their nose to spite their face. No more silly
servants sang [sec] questions on hate related issues; now big burly
cops and the threat of jail are the real deal." Not exactly. The
remaining censorship tentacle is Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code – the
notorious “hate law". However, and this is a big however, unlike
Sec. 13, there are defences -- truth, sincerely held religious belief
or opinion, material discussed for the public good.

Johnathan Kay of the National Post (June 7, 2012) rejoiced at the
demise of Sec. 13: "Canadians had meekly submitted to a system of
administrative law that potentially made de facto criminals out of
anyone with politically incorrect views about women, gays, or racial
and religious minority groups. All that was required was a complainant
(often someone with professional ties to the CHRC itself) willing to
sign his name to a piece of paper, claim he was offended, and then
collect his cash winnings at the end of the process. The system was
bogus and corrupt. But very few Canadians wanted to be seen as
posturing against policies that were branded under the aegis of 'human
rights.”

_____________________________
Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp227.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqgjemgguewwmw
Powered by YourMailingListProvider
 
Page 204 of 454
Powered by MMS Blog