Fighting for Freedom of Speech

October 23, 2013 — xanthippa

A young man I know well is taking a Civics class in High School.  For his ‘Civics’ project on how to improve our society, he had chosen to seek to raise awareness of the importance of Freedom of Speech.  He chose to do this in two ways:

1.  Following the example of FIRE, he considered setting up a ‘Free Speech Wall’ at his school.  He asked for and received a meeting with his Principal where he proposed the idea.  Due to School Board constraints (High School kids are still minors), this was deemed not possible.

However, his Principal was very supportive of his overall goal and they did agree that a ‘Freedom of Speech Page’ in the school’s newsletter would be a good idea:  all students would be encouraged to write why Freedom of Speech is important to them.  Since this high school has students from very diverse backgrounds, it might help to be inclusive for students who have come to Canada recently from more oppressive countries to be encouraged to share their stories of what life without freedom of speech was like and why we, in Canada, must protect this most core of our civil liberties.

He is still negotiating with the teacher in charge of the school newsletter, but he has volunteered to do the work on it and is hopeful that this will become a reality.

2.  Drafting and collecting signatures on a petition to ask our legislators to strengthen the legal protections on Freedom of Speech.  He had sent me the petition and the accompanying letter:  I have taken the names out of it and turned it into a template that each and every one of us can use, collect signatures on the petition and present our own MPs with the demand to strengthen or Free Speech protections!

The accompanying letter:

Petition to strengthen freedom of speech in our laws

To: ___________________________

Member of Parliament of Canada

Dear _________________________:

In the most recent Throne Speech, our Government stressed its committment to the protection of our core rights and fundamental freedoms. The most fundamental of these is the Freedom of Speech, without which no other right or freedom can be defended. There have been many attacks on freedom of speech as of recent, and despite it being the most crucial human right, many people see it as an optional bonus, despite how important it is.


Our Canadian laws are not in line with other democratic countries, like Australia and the United States of America, and make it very easy for unscrupulous people to abuse our laws to chill legitimate political debate. This type abuse was happening under ‘Section 13’ of the Human Rights Code, and you, our lawmakers, have listened to us, the citizens, and repealed that section. Thank you for that!

However, our other laws are now being similarly abused and I would like you, and all our lawmakers, to take steps to pass legislation to strengthen our freedom of speech!

Sincerely yours,

The petition:

This is a petition to my Member of Parliament, Pierre Poilievre, to ask that our law-makers pass federal laws strenghtening protection of the freedom unpon all our civil liberties depend, the Freedom of Speech, from attacks by those wishing to silence political discourse, so that Canadians within all of Canada would have better protections under the law for our most fundamental freedom.

SIGNATURE                                             NAME (Please Print)                       City, Postal Code

1. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

2. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

3. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

4. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

5. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

6. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

7. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

8. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

9. ______________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

10. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

11. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

12. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

13. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

14. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

15. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

This is a petition to my Member of Parliament, Pierre Poilievre, to ask that our law-makers pass federal laws strenghtening protection of the most fundamental of all of our civil liberties, the Freedom of Speech, from attacks from all directions, so that Canadians within all of Canada would have equal protections under the law for our mos fundamental freedom.

SIGNATURE NAME (Please Print) City, Postal Code

16. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

17. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

18. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

19. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

20. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

21. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

22. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

23. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

24. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

25. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

26. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

27. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

28. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

29. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

30. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

This is a petition to my Member of Parliament, Pierre Poilievre, to ask that our law-makers pass federal laws strenghtening protection of the most fundamental of all of our civil liberties, the Freedom of Speech, from attacks from all directions, so that Canadians within all of Canada would have equal protections under the law for our mos fundamental freedom.

SIGNATURE NAME (Please Print) City, Postal Code

31. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

32. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

33. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

34. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

35. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

36. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

37. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

38. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

39. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

40. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

41. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

42. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

43. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

44. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

45. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

This is a petition to my Member of Parliament, Pierre Poilievre, to ask that our law-makers pass federal laws strenghtening protection of the most fundamental of all of our civil liberties, the Freedom of Speech, from attacks from all directions, so that Canadians within all of Canada would have equal protections under the law for our mos fundamental freedom.

SIGNATURE NAME (Please Print) City, Postal Code

46. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

47. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

48. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

49. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

50. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

51. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

52. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

53. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

54. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

55. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

56. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

57. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

58. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

59. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

60. _____________________________ __________________________________ _________________________________

If you would like to receive these files as an attachment to an email, where the formatting is properly done up, please, drop me a line in the comments and I will be happy to send it to you.

Posted in education, freedoms, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , , . 5 Comments »

Help Ezra Levant Protect Our Freedom of Speech

October 17, 2013 — xanthippa
From an email I received:
Dear Xanthippa*,
Please help: tomorrow (Thursday) in a Toronto court house, I’m being sued by Khurrum Awan, the youth president of the Canadian Islamic Congress who tried to censor Mark Steyn.
In fact, he’s suing me for writing about what he did at Steyn’s trial — five years ago!
Of course, it’s just more “lawfare” — the abuse of our western legal process, as a soft jihad against our traditional freedoms.
I won’t get into the details of the lawsuit here — you can see Awan’s Statement of Claim, and my Statement of Defence, here. I’ll make my official comments from the witness box. And you can see a column I wrote about it in the Sun, here. And the great Mark Steyn himself wrote about the trial, here.
But my point is, these radical, Islamic censors are still at it, still trying to silence their critics.
Awan himself gave away the game, in an interview he did after Steyn won his case. Awan told a reporter, “we do not plan to appeal the decision because we attained our strategic objective—to increase the cost of publishing anti-Islamic material.”
That’s what this latest lawsuit against me is: the “strategic objective” of punishing someone who criticizes radical Islam. I published the Danish cartoons of Mohammed; I supported Steyn; and now I have a TV show where I regularly report on radical Islam.
Since joining the TV station, I’ve been protected by the company’s lawyers. But this lawsuit started when I was a blogger, on my own. So I’m on the hook for all of my legal bills. And unlike Awan, I don’t have a big benefactor financing me.
Would you please consider helping me out? I am reluctant to ask, because I know you’ve helped me before. But a lot is at stake here.
This lawsuit is an attempt to undo the free speech victories of the past few years, and to send a warning to any Canadian journalist who dares to speak freely about radical Islam or censorship. It’s designed to instill a sense of fear into the national discussion, to create a “libel chill”.
It’s not just me who’s being targeted — it’s everyone who might ever want to talk about radical Islam. That’s the “strategic objective” of getting everyone to shut up.
I’ve already spent tens of thousands of dollars on lawyers, preparing for the trial. The trial is scheduled to last a week, and could go longer. The total cost will easily reach $50,000 — even if I win, I’ll lose. That’s why they’re doing it.
Can you please help me level the playing field? Can you help fill up my legal war chest, so I can keep standing on guard for our western values of freedom of speech, and the separation of mosque and state? If you can help me with my legal bills, I promise I’ll keep fighting.
You can chip in right now using my secure PayPal button here.
Whether you can donate $5 or $500, it all adds up. Let’s show them we’re as passionate about freedom as they are about censorship.
Wish me luck – I go to court at 10 a.m. tomorrow!
Yours gratefully,
Ezra Levant
P.S. Please help me level the playing field in this lawsuit, by chipping in to my defence fund, here.
P.P.S. And please visit www.StandWithEzra.ca to see the latest news about the trial, and read comments from free speech supporters across the country!

P.P.P.S. Feel free to forward this email to your friends and family who care about freedom too!

*I substituted my ‘nom-de-keyboard’, Xanthippa, for my ‘real-life-name’
Posted in freedoms, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Does Tenure Really Encourage Free Speech? Megan McArdle Tackles Issues in Higher Ed

October 15, 2013 — xanthippa

 

Posted in education, freedoms. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Legal Challenges to NSA Abuse (Laura Donohue)

October 13, 2013 — xanthippa

 

Posted in freedoms, politics, society, technology. Tags: , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Milton Friedman – Too Many Laws

October 13, 2013 — xanthippa

 

Posted in economy, freedoms, philosophy, politics. Tags: , , , , , , . 1 Comment »

What are our innate rights and why are they unalienable?

October 6, 2013 — xanthippa

My post on the Warman vs Free Dominion and John Does verdict has received an unusually high amount of comments – especially for an obscure little blog like mine.  While this is flattering, it does not really diminish the pain this verdict has inflicted on me – even if my interest was not financial (as I was not associated with either the plaintiff nor the defendants, though, I have developed great respect and affection for the defendants over the years that I have followed this case for).

No, my interest may not have been financial, but it is as personal as it gets:  this verdict, as it currently stands, restricts freedom of speech to such a degree that had major media outlets dared to honestly report on it, the populace would rebel.  I honestly believe that to be true – though, some of the comments I received do make me wonder…

For example, one commenter, ‘harebell’, said:

‘You keep posting a series of quotes, that is not an argument for anything it’s a list of people’s opinions.
To claim there are some inalienable, a priori rights based on individual preferences and desires is fine in theory. But each of those individual ideas on rights and preferences will come into conflict with those of others and then both sets will be accused of infringing on the rights of the other and therefore wrong. A person’s rights are what a community agrees they are especially if the community has the power to enforce what it says. It really doesn’t matter whether that community is based on a moral system or an ethical system they will create laws limiting behaviour because my idea of what constitutes freedom will be different to yours. Giving up absolute freedom is the price we pay to live in Canada because we have to live with others.’

Obviously, I tried to explain this, in the following, highly imperfect way:

Individual freedoms are the cornerstone on which our society is built – just read up on our history.

While Americans valued equality, Canadians have always cherished individual freedoms – until, that is, Cultural Marxists re-wrote our textbooks and educated the last generation in revisionist history, depriving it of even the knowledge of its true heritage.

Historians like Professor John Robson have written extensively on this.

But, if you wish to go into some detail here, let me give you a very, very short version:

Canada is a Constitutional Monarchy: this is a form of democracy which is not an absolute democracy ( ‘absolute democracy’ is also called ‘the tyranny of the majority’, as exemplified by two wolves and a lamb taking a vote over what to eat for dinner).

This form of democracy recognizes that each and every citizen has inalienable rights which, no matter how large a percentage of the majority votes to take away, must not be violated. The only legitimate role of government is to protect these rights, so that each and every citizen may exercise them freely.

One such basic right – one we can most easily understand – is the right to bodily integrity. This means that if there are 4 people who need a kidney, a liver, a lung and a heart each, the government cannot arbitrarily appoint a 5th person to be the organ donor, on the grounds that ensuring 4 citizens live outweighs the 1 citizen’s right to live.

(There are very good books by much more intelligent people than I that explain this well – I do urge you to read up on our history.)

In other words, our society is based on the proposition that the majority must not be permitted to harm minorities – even the smallest minority of one citizen. To the contrary, when a government begins to strip citizens of their human rights, that government becomes illegitimate and loses it justification to govern.

It is sad that this was not covered in your civics class in high school…

Of course, the wise and eloquent CodeSlinger answered her much better:

‘harebell:

You write “To claim there are some inalienable, a priori rights based on individual preferences and desires is fine in theory.”

Well, no. It’s not. It’s a contradiction in terms. Rights, being a priori, are derived from first principles and therefore cannot be based on individual preference.

You also write “A person’s rights are what a community agrees they are especially if the community has the power to enforce what it says.”

This, too, is a contradiction in terms. A person’s rights are derived from what kind of creature a human is, and therefore cannot depend on anyone else’s agreement.

Like most Canadians, you have been taught to confuse privileges with rights, and lulled into accepting the poisonous lie that the collective supersedes the individual – in other words, that might makes right. As soon as you accept that, you have enslaved yourself: you cease to be a free individual and become a ward of the state.

The whole idea that rights can somehow be based on consensus is fundamentally flawed.

Consensus, to be productive, requires that each individual contribute independently out of his experience and insight. When consensus comes under the dominance of conformity, the social process is polluted and the individual at the same time surrenders the powers on which his functioning as a feeling and thinking being depends.

— Solomon A. Asch

This concept, “powers on which [a person’s] functioning as a feeling and thinking being depends,” is the core of what we mean by a right. To clarify this, let’s go back to basics. Let’s start with some definitions:

privilege: a special advantage, benefit, or exemption, selectively granted to some but denied to others.

right: a freedom, entitlement, or immunity, so fundamental to human nature it cannot justly be taken away or given up.

See the difference? See how you are disempowered by confusing privileges with rights? See how the government benefits at your expense by using the schools it runs to confuse you in that particular way?

When we speak of “inalienable individual rights,” by the way, the words “inalienable” and “individual” are added only for emphasis and clarity. Strictly speaking, these qualities are already inherent in the definition of “rights.”

Okay. So, what are these inalienable individual rights? They are:

Life, liberty, property, privacy, self-defence, and self-expression.

Why these and only these?

Well, the rights to life and liberty are the essential primary rights and the rights to property, privacy, self-defence, and self-expression are necessary and sufficient to guarantee life and liberty. By necessary and sufficient, I mean that nothing more is needed, and anything less would not be enough.

These six rights form an irreducible core: you either have all of them, or you may as well have none of them.

The inalienable individual rights give form and substance to the idea that every individual is inherently entitled to live and to act in his own self-interest and is immune from being interfered with in so doing. Further, since man is a rational animal, mental life and liberty are as important as physical life and liberty. Neither has value without the other.

Now, these ideas are crystal clear and incontrovertible when people live alone in a state of nature. It is when they come together in groups that confusion often starts – but it need not, if we think carefully and ignore those who have a vested interest in confusing us.

After all, the whole reason individuals form communities is to increase the benefits they derive from exercising their rights in return for accepting some responsibilities to the community – be it a family, village, city, province or nation. This, in a nutshell, is the social contract.

The crucial concept of a contract is quid pro quo: you give something in return for receiving something. Meaning, unless the community increases the benefits you derive from exercising your rights, you owe the community nothing at all.

Thus we must never allow the collective to take precedence over the individual, otherwise we negate the whole reason for forming a collective in the first place! Unless we hold inviolate the principle that the rights of the collective are derived from – and subservient to – the rights of its constituent individuals, the entire social contract becomes null and void, and any attempt to enforce it amounts to tyranny.

From this we can immediately see that the primary duty of the state must be to equally guarantee the equal rights of each and every individual. Whenever the government oversteps the boundaries defined by this primary duty, it breaches the social contract and thereby forfeits its legitimacy.

The whole foundation of the legal system follows just as immediately: a crime is committed whenever any person’s rights are violated and harm results. The severity of the crime is proportional to the harm which results. Thus, where there is no harm, there is no crime. Any law which is incompatible with these principles is unjust, and an unjust law is no law at all.

In other words, your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose, and vice versa.

The whole purpose of the law and the state is to guarantee that to both of us equally, and anything else it does is unnecessary or illegitimate.

Yes, it really is that simple.

And it all rests on the absolute primacy of inalienable individual rights.

The quotes I posted say all that much more clearly and eloquently than I ever could – and also give proper credit to the great men I learned it from. Read their words again, and you will see what I mean:

A right is not what someone gives you, it’s what no one can take away from you.

— U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark

No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

— Thomas Jefferson

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’, because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.

— Thomas Jefferson

It is not the function of the government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error.

— U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson

Must a citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? … It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.

— Henry David Thoreau’

Posted in education, freedoms, philosophy, society. Tags: , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Muslims protect a church in Lahore

October 6, 2013 — xanthippa

We so need much more of this!

Among a deluge of news about Islamic extremists burning/demolishing/desecrating Christian churches, Hindu and Buddhist temples and Synagogues all throughout the Muslim world, among the news of religious murders and bombings, it is most excellent to see moderate Muslims standing up for religious tolerance and protecting their Christian neighbours during worship:

‘Hand in hand as many as 200-300 people formed a human chain outside the St Anthony’s Church adjacent to the District Police Lines at the Empress Road, in a show of solidarity with the victims of the Peshawar church attack two weeks back, which resulted in over a 100 deaths. The twin suicide attack on All Saints church occurred after Sunday mass ended and is believed to be the country’s deadliest attack on Christians.

Standing in the small courtyard of St Anthony’s Church, as Mufti Mohammad Farooq delivered a sermon quoting a few verses of the Holy Quran that preached tolerance and respect for other beliefs, Father Nasir Gulfam stepped right next to him after having conducted a two hour long Sunday service inside the church. The two men stood should to shoulder, hand in hand as part of the human chain that was formed outside the church not just as a show of solidarity but also to send out a message, ‘One Nation, One Blood’.

As part of an attempt to sensitize the public at large, the human chain was the second such event after a similar had been organized in Karachi last week outside the St Patrick’s Cathedral by an organization called Pakistan For All – a collective of citizens concerned about the growing attacks on minorities.

“Well the terrorists showed us what they do on Sundays. Here we are showing them what we do on Sundays. We unite,” said Mohammad Jibran Nasir, the organizer who made the calls for the event on social media.’

Go over to Express Tribune to read the full article and to see photos.

It takes a lot of bravery for people to stand up against the fanatics within their own group, whatever that group may be – religious, political or social.  But, when they do, we must do all we can to support them and spread the word about their actions!

 

 

Posted in freedoms, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

The Day Free Speech Died In Canada – October 2, 2013

October 4, 2013 — xanthippa

An excellent post about this most sad day…

It has quotes, links and goes through the logical steps of where this ruling will lead.

‘The verdict by the jury in the “Warman vs Fournier et al” has effectively killed good, old-fashioned, political discourse and debate in cyberspace, in Canada. Even minor insults and common hyperbole of innocent nature and made-up words not in the dictionary, can now be construed as defamation.

 
The law lesson learned from the verdict is that defamation court actions are designed to stifle online discourse and healthy political debates that used to commonly take place around kitchen tables and then graduated to cyberspace are now less likely to happen in the blogosphere, since all owners of blogs, forums, chat rooms etc. must now become ruthless, editorial police to avoid the risk of libel suits.
 
The law definition of libel states: “Any communication that is likely to lower that person in the estimation of reasonable people and in particular to cause that person to be regarded with feelings of hatred, contempt, ridicule, fear or dislike.”
 

Each and every Canadian ought to now be motivated to action in a gallant effort to redeem free speech in Canada. Most likely, our elected representatives are not yet aware of the significant impact that the verdict in the Warman vs Fournier et al is having on our fragile and ever diminishing right of free speech in Canada.’

Read the full post here.

 

UPDATE:  Another insightful analysis can be read here.

Posted in freedoms, politics, society, technology. Tags: , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

OpenMedia.ca: What are they up to in Bali?

October 3, 2013 — xanthippa

This is from an email from OpenMedia:

In less than a week nearly 100,000 people have signed on to our letter to Stephen Harper and other leaders telling them not to ram through an Internet censorship plan when they meet in Bali.

But now the industry lobbyists behind the Internet censorship plan are ramping up the pressure by publicly urging leaders to not “soften” amidst the public outcry.1

Can you believe that?

We need your help to take the next step to expose this Internet censorship plan before our leaders buckle under the pressure. Can you contribute now so we can step up a multi-faceted citizen awareness campaign before it’s too late?

Once the public knows about the Internet Censorship in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), it will be almost impossible for political leaders to put this plan in place. We need to make sure Canadians know what’s at stake.

Here’s our plan to amplify your voice:

  • Unleash a massive and highly targeted social media campaign to overwhelm political leaders with citizen messages that they cannot ignore. We know the media and politicians pay attention to this.
  • Get the word out in communities across Canada with our powerful, easy-to-use “Letter to the Editor” tool, putting citizen voices in local newspapers, significantly amplifying your voices, and ramping up the pressure on decision makers.

We can only take this next step if you chip in right now. Any amount will help; are you able to pitch in today to make sure Harper gets the message?

With your support, we’ll be able to show Stephen Harper how unpopular this extreme Internet censorship plan is, and prove that there will be a price to pay for it at election time.

We can stop this extreme Internet censorship plan by standing together to send a clear message to our government. Your donations power our efforts to keep fighting against Internet censorship – we can’t move forward without your help now.

Together, we are going to stop the TPP’s Internet censorship from stifling Canada’s future and knocking people off the Internet.

Thank you for being a part of this,

Steve and Jason, on behalf of your OpenMedia.ca team

PS Together, there are hundreds of thousands of us; if each of us gave just $3, we’d be able to send a message that our political leaders can’t ignore.

 

Footnotes

[1] “US Business groups warn against compromises in Pacific Rim trade talks”. Source: Financial Times (paywall) – “Among his key concerns, Mr Donohue said, were that the US would soften its push for strong intellectual property rules…”
OpenMedia.caOpenMedia.ca is a non-profit organization that relies on donations from people like you to operate. Our small but dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way to make your voice heard. Please donate today.

We are an award-winning network of people and organizations working to safeguard the possibilities of the open Internet. We work toward informed and participatory digital policy. You can follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Posted in freedoms, politics, society, technology. Tags: , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Learning from the Koran…

September 28, 2013 — xanthippa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8F2K9Eg_U0

 

Posted in freedoms, politics, religion, society, war. Tags: , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »
« Older posts
Newer posts »