Montreal City Weblog

Kate 20:44 on 2024-05-16 Permalink Reply  

• Rick 09:36 on 2024-05-17 Permalink

  WTF is going on in QC courts….

• Kate 10:24 on 2024-05-17 Permalink

  I would prefer that the courts err on the side of freedom of speech, but each to his own.

• Chris 11:25 on 2024-05-17 Permalink

  Kate, so would I. But it rubs many of us wrong that we seem to live in a world where a comedian (Mike Ward) gets fined $35k for a *joke*, but Charkaoui threatens *violence*, but hey then it’s free speech.

• Kate 11:37 on 2024-05-17 Permalink

  Chris, the Supreme Court invalidated that fine to Mike Ward.

• Kevin 12:49 on 2024-05-17 Permalink

  Chris,
  Mike Ward wasn’t accused of any criminal behaviour. The human rights tribunal and the defamation filings were civil matters.

• bob 12:58 on 2024-05-17 Permalink

  It is an artifact of the way that hate speech laws define the groups that hate speech can apply to. Zionists are not a “section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or mental or physical disability.” (s.318 (4) of the Criminal Code) So you can call for killing all the Zionists, all the librarians, all the people who eat pizza with a knife and fork, and so on, without breaking that law.

  There is also a non-zero probability that he’s a narc.

• Ephraim 16:06 on 2024-05-17 Permalink

  @Kate – Freedom of speech doesn’t mean you are immune to the consequences of that speech. For example, you are free to express support of a terrorist government, but you aren’t free of the consequences that Canada considers that you hid your support and affiliation and violated the terms of your application for immigration/resident status and can strip you of your citizenship, no matter how many years later.

• Ian 17:19 on 2024-05-17 Permalink

  By the same token I could spraypaint a mosque and say I was led to it by Anthony Housefather. Would it stan in court? Hate speech is not as simple as it sounds.

  I can say “Palestinians were put into the role of buffer state by the Egyptian government, knowing their death would incite anger in the Arab world” without being anti-Egyptian. I could say “If you think Zionists are the voice of all Jews you should read about Theresienstadt” without being antisemitic. IF someone heard those words and decided it was grounds to act violently, whether or not a simple statement of historical fact counts as incitement would have to be decided in court.

  That said, Charkaoui sounds like a creep and if he showed up to support my cause I would formally disavow him in whatever organizational capacity possible.