Great News: Toronto area Conservative MP Corneliu Chisu supports Free Speech and Bill
Written by Paul Fromm
Thursday, 03 November 2011 03:41
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:

Great News: Toronto area Conservative MP Corneliu Chisu supports Free
Speech and Bill C-304
(An Act to remove the censorship powers from the fanatical CHRC)

Earlier today I received a fantastic letter from Toronto area
Conservative MP Corneliu Chisu ( )
(Pickering-Scarborough) who support Bill C-304, an Act to Protect
Freedom of Speech ( ),
and strip the censorship powers away from the fanatics of the Canadian
Human Rights Commission.

It is very impressive to see a Toronto-area Conservative MP stand-up
for Freedom of Speech and seconding Bill C-304 (
). Unfortunately, Bill C-304 is a private members bill, and not (yet)
a government bill, so it has a limited chance to even pass. According
to the Parliament of Canada Website, since 1910 only 235 private
members bills have ever passed. (789 private members’ bills were
introduced during the last Parliament, and only four received Royal
Assent, of which one established the National Holocaust Memorial).
But the wind is in the sails for freedom, and numerous Conservative
AND Liberal MPs have spoken publically ( ) about freedom of
speech and removing the ravenous censorship provision Section 13. (In
fact it was Liberal MP Dr. Keith Martin who first proposed (
)a motion in the House of Commons to remove Section 13)

Here is the letter I received today:

Mr. Lemire,

Thank you for your letter that you sent to our Ottawa office regarding
your request for Mr. Chisu to support C-304.

I am pleased to inform you that not only will Mr. Chisu be supporting
the bill, but in fact he is a seconder for C-304 as well.


Matthew van Vorstenbos
Legislative Assistant
Corneliu Chisu, MP Pickering-Scarborough East

What is wrong with Section 13 of the CHRA?

Sections 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act are a direct
attack on the freedom of expression guaranteed to us under the Charter
of Rights and Freedoms. The provisions of these sections allow the
Canadian Human Rights Commission to prosecute anyone alleged to have
said or written something “likely to expose a person or persons to
hatred or contempt” whether there is a living, breathing victim or

Vague concepts such as speech or writing “likely to cause hatred or
contempt” are the basis of expensive state-funded prosecution of
individuals. The statute provides no objective legal test for
“hate” or any objective means of determining what constitutes
“contempt”. As a result, the CHRC is used by various groups and
individuals, as a risk-free taxpayer funded method to silence their
critics and those they disagree with. CHRC investigators have
testified that that “freedom of speech is an American concept” and
therefore not valid in Canada. Such statements are contrary to the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but are standard operating procedure
for the extremists at the CHRC.

Commissioners of the Canadians Human Rights Tribunal, who are not
judges and are often not even lawyers, have held that “truth” is
not a defence against prosecution under Section 13. In fact, if you
argue the truth of your statements, it is then used as proof of your
guilt, and a rational to increase the amount of fines! Intent or fair
comment are also not defenses. In fact, there is not a single listed
defence under Section 13! Because of the lack of any defenses, the
Tribunal has a 100% conviction rate since 1978. The Canadian Human
Rights Tribunal routinely ignores the principles of fundamental
justice, such as the rules of evidence, and these kangaroo courts,
even allow hearsay evidence.

On September 2, 2009 the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found in the
Lemire case that Section 13 was unconstitutional and in violation of
the Charter. In the decision the Tribunal slammed the CHRC for being
aggressive and confrontational. In 2008, the CHRC’s own hand-picked
expert – Richard Moon of the University of Windsor – wrote a
substantial report on Section 13 with his main recommendation being to
repeal it.

Every journalist, writer, Internet webmaster, publisher and private
citizen in Canada can be the subject of a Human Rights complaint for
expressing an opinion or telling the truth. Given the ambiguity of
Section 13, it is virtually impossible for any individual to determine
if they might be in violation of Section 13. Arbitrary censorship and
punishment are wrong, and cannot be justified in a free society.

1: The Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal are not fair, and
make arbitrary decisions based on who an accused is – rather than on
a fair and impartial application of the statute they enforce. High
profile victims, such as Macleans Magazine, Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant
are given a free pass, while others, less prominent and lacking the
resources to hire legal council are relentlessly prosecuted. Friends
of the CHRC are given a free pass to promote hate with impunity, while
others are dragged through 8 years of prosecutions. This creates a
major chill on freedom of expression since there is no discernable
“line” between speech that is prohibited and speech that is
“acceptable” to the CHRC.

2: The CHRC pays no heed to constitutionally protected rights such as
Freedom of Expression. In place they use imaginary “rights” such
as the “right to be free from contempt”. There is no such right in
our Charter. Lead investigators at the CHRC have testified that
“freedom of speech is an American concept” which does not apply to
Canadians. The CHRC only believes in “group” rights, and not the
rights of individuals to “speak truth to power”, hence the 100%
conviction rate.

3: The CHRC is out of control has recently been under a series of
investigations. CHRC investigators have been criminally investigated
by the RCMP for the criminal theft of telecommunications services; The
Privacy Commissioner of Canada has ruled against the CHRC on multiple
occasions. In the meantime, the CHRC continues to apply the law in an
arbitrary and capricious manner.

4: In contravention of their mandate or the law, the CHRC has engaged
in clandestine spying operations on Canadians, including using
neo-Nazi aliases to engage Canadians in conversations. The CHRC has
even gone as far as posting questionable material on neo-Nazi internet
websites. The CHRC shockingly attempted to claim it would injure
“National Security” when information on their neo-Nazi accounts
was subpoenaed by the Tribunal.

5: The entire process is paid for by taxpayers on behalf of the
complainants. The defendants must pay their costs personally. There is
no legal aid and there is no way to claim costs, even if the
defendants are found innocent.

It’s time to abolish the Canadian Human Rights Commission and pack
off this shameful censorship outfit to the “embarrassing lapses”
dustbin of history. I have made some shocking allegations against the
CHRC in this letter, and am more than willing to provide detailed
documentation on each and every point I made in this letter. If you
would like further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

-Marc Lemire
Freedom Activist

See full post at:
or at

Unsubscribe / Change Profile:
Powered by YourMailingListProvider
Powered by MMS Blog