Rights Body Dismisses Maclean’s Case
| AR Articles on Canada |
|---|
| The Great White North (Mar. 1991) |
| Immigration and the Election (Dec. 2000) |
| Search AmRen.com for Canada |
| More news stories on Canada |
The Ontario Human Rights Commission announced Wednesday it had dismissed a complaint about allegedly Islamophobic articles in Maclean’s magazine because it lacked jurisdiction over printed material.
At the same time, however, the commission denounced the newsweekly for publishing articles that were “inconsistent with the spirit” of the Ontario Human Rights Code, and doing “serious harm” to Canadian society by “promoting societal intolerance” and disseminating “destructive, xenophobic opinions.”
“When the media writes, it should exercise great caution that it’s not promoting stereotypes that will adversely impact on identifiable groups,” chief commissioner Barbara Hall said in an interview.
“I think one needs to be very careful when one speaks in generalities, that in fact one is speaking factually about all the people in a particular group.”
This qualified exculpation—Ms. Hall compared it to a judge making comments in a written judgment—was the latest chapter in the growing controversy over free speech in Canada’s human rights bureaucracy.
Her statement drew harsh criticism from a progressive Muslim leader who said the commission had sided with Islamist fundamentalists in the debate among Canadian Muslims over the acceptance of traditional Canadian values.
Maclean’s had not commented as of last night, but on his blog, Mark Steyn, author of the most contentious article about Muslim demographics and the threat to the West, wrote: “Even though they don’t have the guts to hear the case, they might as well find us guilty. Ingenious!”
The complaint, brought by the Canadian Islamic Congress and a group of law students, was about a selection of news articles, columns and a book review about Islam and Muslims published between January 2005 and July 2007. Two similar complaints remain active; one is to be heard by the BC Human Rights Tribunal in June, and the other is before the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
The Ontario complaint was rejected because the relevant portions of Ontario Human Rights Code only address discrimination via signs or symbols, not printed material.
But while rejecting the complaint, the Commission strongly criticised Maclean’s in a statement.
“While freedom of expression must be recognized as a cornerstone of a functioning democracy, the Commission strongly condemns the Islamophobic portrayal of Muslims, Arabs, South Asians and indeed any racialized community in the media, such as the Maclean’s article and others like them, as being inconsistent with the values enshrined in our human rights codes,” it said.
“And, while we all recognize and promote the inherent value of freedom of expression, it should also be possible to challenge any institution that contributes to the dissemination of destructive, xenophobic opinions.”
Faisal Joseph, a lawyer for the complainants, said he was “delighted” by the Commission’s strong stance against the magazine, despite the failure of the complaint. He said he knew the complaint would probably be dismissed, “but we thought this would be an excellent way to demonstrate the gaping hole in human rights legislation in Ontario, and the [Commission] has done exactly that.”
He meant that other jurisdictions—British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and federally—have human rights code provisions against published writings, and so it is “ridiculous” that Ontario does not. He said the inconsistency will require intervention by the Attorney-General to broaden the scope of the legislation.
“The irony of it is that if Maclean’s had put on a sign, an emblem, or a symbol what they said in their publication, it would have been actionable,” he said.
Alan Borovoy, general counsel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, welcomed the decision to dismiss the complaint, and said the inconsistency among the provinces would be best resolved by scrapping all hate speech clauses in human rights law.
“To me, the proper response to that is to remove those sections from the B.C., federal, Alberta and Saskatchewan legislation so they would all desist from attempting to censor the content of print material,” he said.
He said the Commission’s commentary on the failed complaint was a legitimate part of its goal of combatting prejudice in the media and the wider world.
“I think there’s nothing wrong with, on the one hand, declining to use state coercion against material, and on the other hand attempting to persuade people regarding the merits of material. I think the two can validly coexist in a democratic society. You don’t censor, but you might censure. I think that’s all right,” he said. “The Commissions were established to use state coercion against discriminatory deeds, and also to use social persuasion with respect to discriminatory words.”
Tarek Fatah, founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, however, said that for the Commission “to refer to Maclean’s magazine and journalists as contributing to racism is bullshit, if you can use that word.”
He said the Commission has unfairly taken sides against freedom of speech in a dispute within the Canadian Muslim community between moderates and fundamentalists.
“There are within the staff [of the Ontario Human Rights Commission], and among the commissioners, hardline Islamic supporters of Islamic extremism, and this [handling of the Maclean’s case] reflects their presence over there,” Mr. Fatah said, identifying two people by name.
“In the eyes of the Ontario human rights commission, the only good Muslim is an Islamist Muslim,” he said. “As long as we hate Canada, we will be cared for. As soon as we say Canada is our home and we have to defend her traditions, freedoms and secular democracy, we will be considered as the outside.”
The Commisison’s statement comes on the day the Ontario government announced it was spending $14-million to revamp its entire human rights system. As of July, the Commission will no longer receive or process complaints. Instead, complaints will go directly to a Tribunal, which Ms. Hall said frees up the Commission to be more pro-active in promoting human rights, and dealing with systemic issues such as freedom of expression, and to look at them in a broader way.
(Posted on April 10, 2008)
Comments
Human rights commissions, in Canada anyway, are a threat to basic human rights. In Maclean’s magazine, Mark Steyn’s weekly column is of late taking readers through the bizarre and disgusting world of provincial and federal human rights commissions. It’s really all about punishing those persons whose views are not politically correct. Human rights commissions need not follow any standard rules of law, the accused is always found to be guilty (100% conviction rate under the infamous Section 13), the complainant has all his/her costs borne by taxpayers while the accused must pay all his/her costs out of pocket, and so forth. I sometimes wonder if Canada is a democracy anymore. Human rights commissions in this country would make Stalin himself proud.
Posted by Matt at 6:22 PM on April 10
Translation - this far left liberal activist judge no longer feels safe promoting an anti-Canadian agenda in the current political climate of backlash against liberalism.
The problem isn’t solved, by no means, but the wholesale destruction of Canada is slowed down somewhat. If Canadians wake up to the fact that liberalism is generally evil and specifically means them harm in a rather direct manner, the situation could be reversed.
Whether or not that happens, probably depends heavily on if it happens first in the US. Conservatives in the US have a historic opportunity to destroy liberalism forever, starting with the current election cycle. We had the same opportunity the last election cycle but failed miserably to take action. We have another opportunity. Step one is to humiliate that ridiculous caricature of evil leftism, Obama. All the vile things he has chosen to associate himself with, over the years, as he sold his soul for political power, need to be dragged out into the light of day.
Posted by at 6:51 PM on April 10
It appears, we Canadians have gotten ourselves stuck in a quagmire of convoluted verbal diarrhea over the right to freely express ourselves in whatever fashion we choose.
That god-given right of free expression has been hijacked by these marxist sympathizers wrapped under such titles as “human rights” advocates, to wit: socialist Barbara Hall, a failed socialist Toronto mayoralty candidate.
Our ‘Big Sister’ and others of her ilk, now help us mind our manners by scolding grown adults and even magazines over the use of personal expressions.
If U.S. citizens give up the right to free expression in their own country, as Canadians have miserably done so, then flying the “hammer & sickle” over this continent will be a fait accompli.
Posted by at 7:13 PM on April 10
>>
“While freedom of expression must be recognized as a cornerstone of a functioning democracy, the Commission strongly condemns the Islamophobic portrayal of Muslims, Arabs, South Asians and indeed any racialized community in the media…
>>
Would a non-self-hating white org like AmRen qualify as “indeed any racialized community in the media” according to this Human Rights Star Chamber?
Or do you (white) liberals who enforce speech codes on (white) citizens in our various (white) democracies not believe that whites are even capable of BEING a racialized community? Can Caucasians be a recognized group entitled to free legal defense from slanders against US, too? Or is that too retrograde a concept for a Canadian Human Rights Commissioner to consider?
But before you answer, Mr. or Ms. Bureaucrat, remember that — thanks to the antics of ostentatiously “virtuous” speech-squelchers such as yourself — the NUMBER of such racialized white people grows and grows with each passing month.
Racialized, and sometimes even radicalized.
And if Mr. or Ms. Bureaucrat would like to know WHY this is happening, it’s because of the REVULSION any sensible, freedom-loving North American feels at Big Brother-style micro-managing of the good ol’ Vox Populi by bureaucracies EXACTLY LIKE THIS PUTRID COMMISSION.
Posted by The Incredible Shrinking White Man at 7:32 PM on April 10
The crisis with modern human rights bureaucracies (in Canada, Europe, the U.N.) is most severe with issues related to freedom of speech. Islamic extremism voicing its hatred and anti-Western sentiments gets a free pass, or is politely ignored. White-majority criticisms of minorities are viewed as “incitement” or “promoting societal intolerance”
We all expect anti-Western sensibilities at the United Nations, but should we be surprised by anti-Western bias in European or Canadian human rights commissions? After all, these institutions are too often run by people with left of center prejudices, trying to eradicate ideas that offend their politically correct notions, all in the name of human rights. Just who are they to judge “destructive, xenophobic opinions”, when they have so many destructive majorityphobic opinions of their own?
Those who value free speech must insist on that right as a basic human right. Intellectual freedom must be reaffirmed in the context of human rights. These “human rights” tribunals and commissions must learn to read and understand article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Posted by at 8:51 PM on April 10
“Faisal Joseph, a lawyer for the complainants, said he was “delighted” by the Commission’s strong stance..”
“Tarek Fatah…said the Commission has unfairly taken sides against freedom of speech in a dispute within the Canadian Muslim community between moderates and fundamentalists.”
“Maclean’s…Mark Steyn… wrote: ‘Even though they don’t have the guts to hear the case, they might as well find us guilty. Ingenious!’”
Everyone’s unhappy, except the most destructive people involved. That’s the best you can hope for under Multiculturalism.
The comments of Tarek Fatah on the nature of the Ontario HRC are fascinating:
“There are within the staff, and among the commissioners, hardline Islamic supporters of Islamic extremism…” Mr. Fatah said, identifying two people by name.
“In the eyes of the Ontario human rights commission, the only good Muslim is an Islamist Muslim,” he said. “As long as we hate Canada, we will be cared for. As soon as we say Canada is our home and we have to defend her traditions, freedoms and secular democracy, we will be considered as the outside.”
Apparently the hard-line element among the invaders (as if the “soft-line” element weren’t damaging enough to the integrity of Canadian culture) has captured part of the commission that was already charged with suppressing all opposition to foreign invasion. The hard-line values of the invaders—suppression of free speech—are now being imposed. Not yet as harshly as in the countries the invaders come from; it may be awhile before the first non-legally sanctioned beheadings occur.
Who opened the gates to these invaders and continues to hold the gates open? I suspect the answer is complex, but it needs to be considered.
Posted by H. Dumpty at 9:58 PM on April 10
The Human Rights Commission in Canada should be abolished!
Political Correctness is just a “polite and poisonous way” of stripping us of our right to freedom of speech… Shutting our mouths so that we cannot express what we clearly see with our own eyes or clearly hear with our own ears.
Of course, it’s only “whitey” who has to practise these politically-correct laws… Every other ethnic group can say whatever they want!
I’m tired of the double standard. I’m tired of having to be a “typical white person.”
Posted by Jackers at 10:00 PM on April 10
It’s astonishing to me the the Ontario Human Rights Commission used the word ‘racialized’ in their statement.
“the Islamophobic portrayal of Muslims, Arabs, South Asians and indeed any racialized community”
To the best of my knowledge, the word ‘racialized’ is a very recent addition to the lexicon of race hucksters. It was created so that the speaker can get around admitting that whites are a race. By inferring that all non-whites belong to the ‘racialized’ world suggests race isn’t a valid concept, but is, instead, an identifier imposed on them.
Anyone using this dubious jargon is showing that they’ve bought into the race rhetoric and agenda of anti-white extremists.
Posted by at 11:39 PM on April 10
6:51 p.m., no defense of Obama here, but I can’t find a lot to like in any of the candidates in 2008. If anything, Hillary Clinton is even worse— a self-hating white woman who wants to open up our borders wholesale to Latinos and others from whom she things she can buy votes. While increasing affirmative action to intolerable levels, and taking money from white taxpayers to give a “child credit” for every new baby that a minority group has. At least with Obama, we’d know the danger that we’re getting and we’d be always on the lookout for anything against our people— yet Hillary is so repulsive in every way possible, pretending to be one of us, when she and her husband are actively seeking out the destruction of our people.
Even among the Republicans, John McCain isn’t exactly someone you’d call to the rescue. He’s perhaps the best alternative, only because the other two are so utterly atrocious. And at the very least, the guy has some integrity and spent five years fighting for his country in a POW camp. But I still can’t stand his policies. I’d hold my nose and vote for McCain only out of sheer principle and some respect for old-fashioned integrity, not because I like the guy one bit.
Posted by Casey James at 1:15 PM on April 11
If the word “democracy” includes the basic right to freedom of speech, then modern Canada cannot be called a democracy. The existance of these unacountable, quasi-Marxist “Human Rights Tribunals” (the name is Orwellian. These bodies suppress human rights, at least those of the White majorities)is a sign that democracy is dying, if not dead, in Canada.
At the same time the double standard exibited by the political and social elites, exemplified by these commisions, should make any reasonable person conclude that the only group being discriminated against is the founding White population. Canada is only a very short distance away from Europe in it’s development of a “soft” totalitarianism. It won’t be long before it begins to jail dissidents who protest the dissolution of their right to speak freely, or who point out the nature of our new Muslim minorities. Or, for that matter, any “racialized” minority. The jackboot of totalitarianism is firmly upon the throats of the majority population in Canada. So firmly entrenched in the body politic of Canada is this PC tyranny that only an uprising of it’s citizens could possible free us. Unfortunatly Canada’s majority White population is so indoctrinated and passive that any such rebellion is almost unimaginable. Even if it were to occur, the state would not hesitate to mow down it’s White citizens, or imprison them, as is happening right now in the EU-SSR.
Some might point out the apparent absurdity of a Marxist bodies such as these various Commisions and Tribunals coming to the defense of groups that espouse religious bigotry and hatred with the full power of the state. However the contadictions inherent here are apparent only to free thinking people. Muslims, despite the fact that they are not a race, are in the eyes of these scary Tribunals and Commisions, a protected minority. As such they have the freedom to shout their hate and intolerence from the rooftops without worry of censure. Indeed, if anyone from the majority White population points out that this, and other, “protected groups” are “promoting societal intolerance” and disseminating “destructive, xenophobic opinions” (in the wording of our glorious Commissions) they will be set upon, and destroyed. This is the state of my Country. As such, I no longer recognise Canada as the once free country that historicaly it was. I now regard Kanada as a hostile regime dedicated to the destruction of the freedoms and existance of it’s founding White population. Therefore I do not recognise the right of these govermental organs to exersize their power over me or my fellow dissidents. That will not stop them from doing so, of course. But it allows me to free myself from any loyalty to this regime. It also allows me, and any other dissedents who exist, to be freed from any intellectual or moral obligation to support the continued existance of said regime.
Posted by White Canadian at 8:22 PM on April 11
I agree with the posters who say Canada isn’t a democracy. It’s becoming a fascist state with those in power stripping away the rights of Canadians, one by one.
I believe that this started manifesting itself around 30 years ago, when Ontario province would haul National Hockey League players into court on assault and battery charges, for fighting on ice; during the course of a National Hockey League game. At the time, I wondered, “What TF are they doing”, since fighting in a hockey game is as natural and a part of the game as are skating and stickhandling.
I know that prosecuting hockey players for fighting is not on a par with charging a magazine for portraying Muslims in what they consider an unflattering light, but taken together, show that Canada is becoming more and more repressive.
Posted by Soprano Fan at 3:43 PM on April 13
No generalzing she says. Because the generalization may not
be true of all members of the group. Er, yes-that’s why it’s cal-
led a generalization. Generalization seeks the mean, median, and
meaningful-not the superb or low. Don’t generalize? That’s another way of saying don’t classify which is another way of say-
ing don’t think. Now that’s why she’s against it.
Posted by Leif the Lucky at 11:22 PM on April 14
“The jackboot of totalitarianism is firmly upon the throats of the majority population in Canada. So firmly entrenched in the body politic of Canada is this PC tyranny that only an uprising of it’s citizens could possible free us. Unfortunatly Canada’s majority White population is so indoctrinated and passive that any such rebellion is almost unimaginable. “
White Canadian
— — — — — — — — —
Only if there’s a complete breakdown of everything. The economy, the currency, the government, the law enforcement, the transportation, the food supply. EVERYTHING.
Only when people find themselves left entirely on their own, will they organize and take independent action. And then, only because they MUST. Modern populations have become sheep and are too accustomed to being taken care of.
Posted by browser at 6:27 AM on April 15