Eric Brazeau: Canada’s honest-to-goodness political prisoner

Did you know Canada has an honest-to-goodness political prisoner?

His name is Eric Brazeau.  He is being held at a maximum security jail – Millhaven…for having had a politically incorrect conversation.

Recently, I have received a fundraising request fro the Conservative Party of Canada – and this is how I have replied:

To:  Jaime Girard

Director, Fundraising and Membership Services
Conservative Party of Canada

Dear Mr. Girard,

While I understand the importance of raising funds, us ‘regular people’ are dealing with a lot right now.
For example, are you aware of the plight of Eric Brazeau – Canada’s first honest-to-goodness political prisoner?
Mr. Brazeau’s private conversation was overheard by a third party, who was offended and made a criminal complaint.  Mr. Brazeau was arrested and is being held without bail until his trial on the grounds that if he were granted bail, he might again discuss his honestly held views.
The most troubling thing about his ‘no bail’ condition is that by the time his trial date comes up, he will have served longer in jail than the longest possible sentence for the crime he had been charged with!!!
I am not making this up – this is Canada today.  A person can be jailed for longer than the maximum potential sentence for his crime, without any conviction, for fear that he might express his honestly held opinions!
How is this possible – under Conservative rule?
Please, explain to me what the Conservative Party of Canada is doing to help Eric Brazeau and the travesty of justice his case has become.  Please, let me know your party’s policy on political prisoners such as Eric Brazeau.  If I approve of your party’s action plan to free Eric Brazeau and to prevent more political prisoners to be jailed in Canada, I will consider your request to contribute funds to your party.
Alexandra Belaire
blogging as Xanthippa
P.S. This letter is being published and I will be happy to also publish any and all replies (or lack thereof) you may make.

15 Responses to “Eric Brazeau: Canada’s honest-to-goodness political prisoner”

  1. Alainnah Robertson Says:

    Mr. Eric Brazeau was offending against the Canadian Criminal Code, Sections 318-319. No one is allowed to stir up hatred against any group of people. Mr. Brazeau was stirring up hatred against Muslims collectively.

    • Chidanand Says:

      “stirring up hatred against Muslims collectively.’

      by handing out pamphlets? are you insane? That is NOT stirring up hatred. I’ve had all types of pamphlets giving to me angrily denouncing various groups whether they be political or religious or whatever. Its only when its Islam that the government gets into action. Its true cowardice and hypocrisy in western nations.

    • Poetentiate Says:

      it’s interesting that truth is not a valid defense. What you say can be a 100% accurate and still land you in jail. Yes, he is a political prisoner, “Soviet” style.

  2. peterodonnell Says:

    Okay, but he’s not the only political prisoner. Brad Love was held in an Ontario jail for expressing dislike of Jews. Brazeau apparently chose Muslims as his dislike. Now, if you stand up and complain about Christians, you will no doubt be on a fast track to social success. Imagine the shock and horror of the mass media if anyone were to be tossed into the slammer for anti-Christian diatribes.

    One could also say that the members of Free Dominion and in particular the Fourniers are subject to political repression even if we are not technically political prisoners. Then there is the case of Linda Gibbons who has spent a good deal of time (about eight years) in jail (once again in Ontario) for speaking out against abortion. That was recently overturned, somebody did not get the memo apparently.

    The status of freedom of speech in Canada is weak and under continuous threat from both the elected governments and the undeclared self-appointed elitist government. This is mainly directed at social conservatives but the present federal government has seen the power of the concept of lawfare and has adapted it to use against left-wing protestors, in particular, environmentalists. This has also attracted the opposition of the BCCLA, whose list of concerns at the moment ranges from pipeline protestors to Arthur Topham, the protocols guy.

    It would seem that the elitist view of freedom of speech is that people should have the opportunity to say how much they agree with academic orthodoxy. it is some sort of bogus Soviet-style philosophy that was to be expected after a couple of decades of hollowing out of what was left of academic freedom of inquiry. That was never very robust but it died on the operating table some time ago.

    Anyway, I wouldn’t give money to this government until they show some recognition of the problems of lawfare in general. I don’t blame them above all others for this state of affairs but they wanted to rule and hold power, and this comes with the territory. They need to step up to the plate, for one thing, they have the one place in town where you can say what you think without some knob of a lawyer sending you a letter the next day. That is a privelege they should think about using more often.

    • xanthippa Says:

      You are correct: but this one has a twist. He will have been kept in jail (bail denied) prior to his trial for longer than the maximum sentence he could have been sentenced to, if he will have been found guilty.

      Regardless of who he is and what he did, that just simply does not compute…

    • Voice of Reason Says:

      re: Linda Gibbons

      Who deserves every minute in prison for ignoring Court orders against her. It is a lot more than just “speaking out” Roger.

      What happened to the ” Rule of Law” conservatives?

  3. peterodonnell Says:

    Nothing about recent Canadian legal trends in the area of free speech computes … we are giving away our freedoms (I would call them God given, presumably you might say inherent) despite fancy-worded charters and declarations, in part because we don’t honour the spirit of the law, and in part because some of these laws are actually designed to infringe on personal freedom to create advantages for selected client groups of the worry-wart nanny state.

    The elephant in the room is simply this — what if some group actually are what their critics say they are? Do we have to assume that every group in society lacks faults, that they are all good? Look at history and you’ll see that this has never been the case. It is not the case now.

    They say the law is an ass, but perhaps it just starts there.


    • Maikeru Says:

      The elephant in the room is simply this — what if some group actually are what their critics say they are?
      What if Roger Smith, aka Peter O’Donnell, is actually Nobby McNasty you say ?
      What I wonder is when, exactly, Canada/Canadians ceased to be tolerant,
      1941 ?
      1950 ?
      1968 ?
      1974 ?
      1992 ?
      1999 ?
      2003 ?
      2014 ?

      • xanthippa Says:

        I’d peg it near the 1992 era…though perhaps a bit earlier, towards the end of the Trudeau reign in the 1980’s: that’s when we learned that English Canada had no culture of its own and therefore had to submit to every other culture.

  4. Anomaly Says:

    I didn’t see him stir up any hate against Muslims. It looked more like stirring up Muslims to hate him. I doubt he would get a fair trial but at least he should get one.

  5. xanthippa Says:

    Here is an interesting writeup from someone who actually went to Brazeau’s bail hearing, contrasting the treatment of a violent armed robber and Eric Brazeau by the Canadian justice system.

    TL;DR: a repeat violent armed robber sits in jail prior to his trial for close to the length of his likely jail sentence, so he is released while Brazeau, charged with having a private conversation a bystander did not like, is kept in jail prior to his trial for longer than the maximum potential jail sentence for his transgression.

  6. Mary Allen Says:

    I used to know Eric Brazeau. It doesn’t surprise me this is what he’s doing these days, but it does disappoint me because he’s not a complete ding dong. About hating people for racist reasons?–he couldn’t understand it– he once told me “There are better reasons for hating people–like smelly feet and big noses”. Nowadays all of his bullshit (and believe me, it’s bullshit) is for attention–even if it’s for the worst kind. That’s all it is– attention. And at this point the attention and what he does to get it has become a self-licking ice cream cone. Failed at so many ‘business ventures’, never was able to get it together long enough to get a good education and do something productive with his life. The king of cutting his nose off to spite his face. It was exhausting being a friend. Always was and obviously still is an angry, angry dude with serious issues, many related to his adoptive mother. Can’t imagine he was an easy kid to raise. So before you get all defending him–you should do some digging on his background. Mental issues. Big ones. Just sayin’

  7. mary gratton Says:

    My comment is simple. Eric Brazeau has been unduly punished for expressing his opinions in public. Free speech is clearly not a right in Canada. I want the laws changed so no one is prosecuted nor sent to jail for expressing their opinions just because they offend some group. Forget these preposterous charges of inciting genocide.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: