Monday, March 08, 2010
Rights & Democracy demonstrates its financial transparency, by Francis Chartrand
The International Center for Human Rights and Democratic Development announced today that it has engaged the firm Samson Bélair / Deloitte & Touche to conduct a forensic audit of financial transactions between 2005 and 2009. In announcing the interim president, Mr. Jacques Gauthier said that the purpose of this audit was to ensure full transparency regarding the proper use of taxpayers' money.
"Democracy requires an obligation to explain that while rights require accountability of work," argued Mr. Gauthier. "As an institution that receives 11 million dollars annually federal government, ie taxes Canadians Rights & Democracy has a duty to report on how these funds are spent. In addition, we have a responsibility to ensure they are properly managed."
The acting president also said that neither he nor the board does have evidence of misconduct individually. However, financial reviews have identified transactions that require the attention of forensic auditors. "We asked the professionals to give us the exact picture of certain contracts and transactions made over the last five years."
Representatives of the firm Samson Bélair / Deloitte & Touche, who undertake the audit immediately, should be able to present a report and recommendations within three weeks. "The results will be released as soon as possible, that is to say when the report is accepted by the Board of Directors," Mr. Gauthier said finally.
Rights & Democracy (International Center for Human Rights and Democratic Development) is a non-partisan organization of an international mandate that was created in 1988 by the Canadian Parliament to encourage and support the universal values of human rights and promote democratic institutions and practices around the world.
Rights & Democracy seeks to promote, in collaboration with individuals, organizations and governments in Canada and abroad, human rights and democratic rights as defined in the International Bill of Human Rights.
For further information: or to arrange an interview with a representative of Rights & Democracy: Prima Communications, (514) 654-1742, primacommunion@gmail.com
Link
Labels: Canada, Francis Chartrand, Freedom of expression
Sunday, February 07, 2010
The radios who are silent, by Francis Chartrand
Corus Entertainment silenced two of its radio stations. AM Info690 Montreal and AM940 Montreal's Greatest Hits ceased operations Friday night at 19 pm
For Corus Entertainment, "it is clear that stations Info690 and AM940 are not viable". The company claims to have lost one million dollars per year for the past eight years, with two radio stations.
The broadcaster said this decision despite the fact that "Corus Quebec and its employees have invested time and energy to revive these units".
This decision affects 10 private broadcaster posts in total. These are positions of journalists, columnists assigned to traffic as well as operations staff.
However, Corus will retain eight of the ten affected employees: Five journalists and three columnists to traffic will be diverted to other stations in the group, such as CKOI and 98.5 FM.
Corus news does not cease to exist because it will serve all our partners, such as Radio North, and will be present in our network is in Quebec City, Trois-Rivieres, Saguenay, Ottawa short, everywhere where they broadcast.
- Annick Bélanger, spokesman for Corus Quebec
The CRTC will recover the operating licenses of the two AM stations.
Info690 station whose call letters are CINF was began broadcasting in December 1999. She took over from CKVL present in the radio world Montrealers since 1946.
Info690 was owned by Metromedia CMR, which subsequently sold its radio holdings to Corus Entertainment. The company employs 466 people in Quebec. The direction of Info690 had already eliminated 12 jobs in the newsroom in February 2009.
A changing media landscape
Let's recall that the CBC had sought, with the CRTC, a license to launch its own news channel on the 940. This frequency was also the former frequency of CBC on the AM band, before the CBC does not migrate to FM 88.5.
But ultimately the project of the CBC had not been retained by the CRTC.
Radio-Canada.ca with the Canadian Press.
Well, my comment now.
Info 690 in Montreal and 940 News were in service since December 1999, when CKVL 850 was spent at 690 and CIQC 600 was spent on 940. Why? Because radio frequencies are allocated to consortia. And that CBC and Radio-Canada had no more their AM stations. CBF had increased to 690 and 95.1 CBM 940 was passed in 88.5.
The management of Corus (CKOI, CFQR, CKVL, CIQC) wanted to acquire two radio channels of all news, as Bloomberg Radio WBBR 1130, WCBS 880 or WINS 1010 New York stations that can sometimes catch a vehicle in the Montreal area. What was to be a first in Canada.
At the same time, the same project surfaced in the management of the CBC. And they are Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa for their pilot project, a "RDI" and "Newsworld" on the AM with the local traffic to 10 minutes, the national weather for 13 minutes and a reminder of the headlines 15 minutes.
Project Name: Info Express and News Express. In Montreal, the CBC is still the owner of AM frequencies 690 and 940. The solution: take them back. Anyway the CBC were other ambitious projects: the TV Arts (now ARTV), Bande à part, which would see the day to 104.5 as CBC Radio 3 which would see the day 91.9 and Sports Extra in French on the AM frequency 900 and in English on AM frequency 650.
If all the projects had emerged, we would have in Montreal: the First Channel 95.1, Espace Musique at 100.7, Bande a part at 104.5, Info Express 690, Sports Extra, 900 CBC Radio 1 at 88.5, CBC Radio 2 to 93.5, CBC Radio 3 to 91.9, Express News Sports Extra 940 and the 650. That's a lot of radio stations with our taxes, you say. But what does think the CRTC?
The CRTC had therefore asked the SRC to determine in its many projects. And while Corus would recycle its 2 stations, and CKVL CIQC, then cut the CRTC to move forward in granting a all news license. And refusing to be beaten by the CBC, Corus plans to move its frequency to those who belonged to the CBC. CKVL passed to the former CBF and CIQC went to former CBM.
Then came the 2000s, a decade when people became more and more followers of MP3s, listen to more music. People let go of the format "talk radio", always more and more disgusted by the current international, political correctness, the sports disappointments Montreal (Canadiens less present in the playoffs, the Expos between life and death), and the consequences of September 11 leaves a climate of fear which does taste more people to learn. Finally, the era of "I don't wanna know" and "I don't give a fuck" begins for a decade.
Even the station attracted more than 1 300 000 listeners in 1995, CKOI, falling to 600 000. People have CD players in vehicles. CD engraved replace MP3 MIX 96, CKOI, CKMF, CHOM. The sports websites replace the sports programs at CKAC and CKGM short, the website will play a major role in the future of radio, as well as other forms of media.
Then came the 90s, where the failures of the Canadian and Quebec society are felt. The Oka Crisis, the failure of the Meech Lake Accord, the referendum failed about Charlottetown Accord, the first Gulf War. People are moving away from more information and more.
We go to merge the two largest networks of private talk radio, Radiomutuel and Telemedia. In Montreal, Quebec, Chicoutimi, Hull, Sherbrooke and Trois-Rivieres, stations will close in 1994 as CKLM 1570 in Laval. CJMS 1280 Radiomutuel to merge with Montreal CKAC 730 of Telemedia, CJRP 1060 Radiomutuel to merge with Quebec CHRC 80 of Telemedia, CJMT 1420 Telemedia to merge with Chicoutimi CKRS 590 Radiomutuel in Jonquiere, 970 CKCH Telemedia merged with Hull CJRC 1150 Radiomutuel in Gatineau, CJRS 1510 Sherbrooke Radiomutuel to merge with CHLT 630 Telemedia and CJTR 1140 Radiomutuel at Three Rivers merged with CHLN 550 of Telemedia.
Thus is born the network Radiomédia, born of the merger September 30, 1994, a network that Astral Media will own, in addition to Rock and Relaxation Radiomutuel on FM Radio which will become Energy (CHIK 98.9 in Quebec City, IGBC at Three Rivers, CIKI 98.7 in Rimouski, Sherbrooke CIMO 106.1, 94.5 CJAB in Jonquière, Drummondville CJDM 92.1, 99.1 CJMM in Rouyn-Noranda, CJMV 102.7 in Val-d'Or, CKMF 94.3 to 104.1 CKTF Montreal and Gatineau), to become Energy from 2001 to 2009, eventually becoming NRJ in 2009, curiously the extension of a network with the same name, but in France. While his station anglophone Montreal Astral, Virgin Radio, is also an extension of a network with the same name, but in the United Kingdom.
We come back to talk radio. CIEL 98.5 FM closed its doors in 2000, Corus (an Alberta company buys the frequency to a sister station to CKOI; CKOO aka COOL 98.5, an alternative rock station (which I loved to listen for that matter) who undertook format every year. In 2001 it became a modern rock station, becoming in 2003 a classic rock station, and January 5, 2004, becomes CHMP (Le FM parlés de Montréal).
The first shot of the station is going to look for hands CKAC (Astral) the morning man Paul Arcand, Gilles Proulx for the issuance of the return and it will be the broadcaster of the games of the Montreal Expos in their last season. CKAC is found in the morning with Mario Langlois morning, Jean Lapierre in the morning, Pierre Mailloux in the afternoon, sports fans to return to 4:00 PM, Canadiens games and Alouettes, Ron Fournier, Jacques Fabi to the night and Serge Plaisance and Roger Drolet during weekend.
However, having a high quality radio entertainment, this is where everything is upsetting. Astral Media talks to sell the 6 stations Radiomédia but wants to keep CJAD 800. The future of the station has been questioned in recent years due to the decline of AM radio in Quebec, while in recovery throughout the rest of Canada.
Quebecor wanted to buy the station, but this offer was blocked by the CRTC to avoid excessive media concentration. A consortium comprised of Radio North Genex and then offered to buy the station, but has since withdrawn the offer. In 2004, Corus Entertainment has offered to buy CKAC and other Astral stations for the price of eleven million dollars. The CRTC approved the transaction in January 2005. But it will not be without consequences.
The intention of Corus was initially to close the newsroom of CKAC to redirect content to sports and health. This has angered a wide audience perceived the traditional content as a cultural institution in Quebec.
And there begins a hell in which Corus sailed with both feet, as Corus owns 3 stations "talk radio" in Montréal, 98.5 FM Parlé, CKAC, and in english, 940 Montreal (Info690 being that of all news radio). On September 14, 2005, the format of continuous disclosure of 940 becomes 940 News Montreal, format "talk radio" to compete on CJAD, still owned by Astral and his rivals in the ratings with Joe Cannon in the morning, Jim Duff return (sometimes I listened), Charles Adler, in the afternoon on all the stations "talk radio" Corus across the country, and Coast to coast, the "talk radio" live during the night.
An appeal was launched to the Canadian federal government to cancel the purchase of Corus, but the newsroom was officially closed May 30, 2005. Recently the station has been criticized for his columns on sex in prime time. On 1 March 2007, CKAC announced that effective April 2, 2007 the station broadcasts only sports news and concentrate only on the sports field. Yes, it closes the famous newsroom CKAC, operating since 1922.
Then Corus gets in trouble because of financial difficulties led them to turn 940 Montreal to AM 940, an oldies station, June 6, 2008.
Corus is not his first killing. On April 16, 2007, CKRS 590 Saguenay passes to 98.3, CJRC 1150 Gatineau passes to 104.7. On August 20, 2007, CHLT 630 Sherbrooke passes to 107.7 and CHLN 550 Trois-Rivières passes to 106.9. CJTR (later CHLN) had a sister station in Shawinigan, CKSM 1220. Not having been in the transaction to Corus station died June 30, 2007. On March 28, 2009, its stations "talk radio" will all members of a new network: Memories Guaranteed, a competitor to Boom FM, another network of Astral Media. On 1 May 2009, their old AM frequencies are finally dead.
Then these 2 stations who die in Montreal. CHRC 80 has escaped this fall, becoming independent. This station is now called Quebec 800.
Yes, the future of talk radio darkens. And it scares me. Because radio stations where there are open lines where people can express themselves remain one of the vertebrae of our democracy. But if I wanted to censor, keep the public in ignorance, attack the knowledge and information, I would not take otherwise. I would cut off the microphone to all these leaders open lines and I would put some music, and some sleepy music.
Sleep, public asleep.
Because a listened radio by a radio audience is healthy.
Francis Chartrand
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Freedom of expression, Media, Québec
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Jacques Brassard critical sacred cow, it is no longer review, by Anne Humphreys
Jacques Brassard former PQ minister, slayer of the foibles of political correctiva and ready-to-think multiinterculturalist, including the ERC program that appears to a "bouillabaisse of religions", imposed surreptitiously no longer Chronic Daily Saguenay.
His crime? Having defied Steven Guilbeault spokesman Équiterre and the "facts established and recognized by the international scientific community". As if the overreaction was a scientific argument, as if scientists emit no doubts as to the origin purely anthropogenic global warming as if it would necessarily be bad for the country like Quebec, Russia, the Alaska, Canada, Scandinavia, in short, a very large portion of land.
Recall that the Ombudsman de Radio-Canada, Mrs. Miville-Deschenes, had already denounced in May 2009 the lack of diversity at the SRC in specifically mentioning Mr. Steven Guilbeault: "One example alone, Steven Guilbeault, former director Greenpeace in Quebec, has been heard 120 times on radio and television of Radio-Canada in 2007."
The elements of the crime: The Chronicle of Jacques Brassard: "The prophecy of Andy Warhol is realized".
Excerpts:
"One of the most prelates to the episcopate ecological warming Steeve Guilbeault.
The geologist and seismologist at the retreat UQAC, Reynald Du Berger, also an engineer by training, recently became interested in this self-proclaimed expert. He discovered that higher education than Steeve Guilbeault had discussed were theological. He did not realize, however, until graduation, but has retained the propensity to dogmatism. This unfinished theologian who, for years, lecturing us on the climate, forests and energy. And that is about a fawning reverence from all media, especially Radio-Canada, Télé-Québec and Le Devoir.
Notices
Previously, Steeve Guilbault pontificated from Greenpeace and now he preaches the gospel to Équiterre, an eco congregation Quebec. It is for all practical purposes, the Sunflower appointed Professor of Radio-Canada. Recently, zapping the morning (which happens rarely), I saw the "Lion". He held forth on the climate while denigrating Stephen Harper. The animators were enraptured by this "spiritual guide".
In fact, to my knowledge, I have never seen this fat person or seriously questioned closely by the facilitator bureaucrats Crown corporation. These are not always as tenure, allowing him to present his helmet on forests and climate. Not embarrassing questions that might expose the shortcomings of his knick-knacks doctrine."
Équiterre defends Steven Guilbeault.
Supplement to counter the unanimity ecologist textbooks and notebooks RCT
Debate among academics at the University of Nantes June 7, 2009 on global warming (1 / 4)
Serge Galam, "global warming is not proven"
Write (politely) to complain about this disturbing barrier to debate and free expression:
redaction@lequotidien.com
Le Quotidien
1051, boul. Talbot
Saguenay, Québec
Canada, G7H 5C1
Phone: 418 545-4474
Link
Labels: Anne Humphreys, Freedom of expression, Human mistake, Québec
Thursday, October 29, 2009
What was Obama thinking?, by Francis Chartrand
In the wake of the debacle of Chicago's rejection as the Olympic venue for the 2016 summer games, the question probably occurred to most Americans: What was President Obama thinking when he dramatically personalized the U.S. bid by joining his wife in Copenhagen to appeal for the selection of his adopted city?
Apparently, the answer lies with the hubris that has characterized Obama's ascendancy. To be sure, most politicians have outsized egos. It is not just an occupational hazard; it seems to be a necessary character defect for many of those willing to submit themselves to the often nasty bump-and-grind of elective politics.
Still, Barack Obama has long seemed in a class of his own when it comes to his self-confidence, seemingly born of a charmed life of extraordinary opportunities and, by and large, a lack of accountability for his actions. In this case, his arrogance appears to have caused him and his handlers to believe that, by taking the unprecedented step of having an American president show up in person to lobby the International Olympic Committee (IOC), his rock-star status would assure Chicago's selection.
It is clear that, in the aftermath of the IOC's decision to eliminate America's Windy City in the first round of voting and to select instead Rio de Janeiro, this rejection was not only a stunning personal failure for "The One," (a title Obama's admirers seem to have embraced as much as his critics). It amounts to a repudiation of the United States, contributing - whether intentionally in this instance or not - to the sort of "diminishing of our country" that I have previously described as one of three elements of the "Obama Doctrine." (The other two are "undermining of our allies" and "emboldening of our enemies.")
A far more important exercise in "What was Obama thinking?" arises from another of his recent, dubious diplomatic initiatives: Last week, the United States joined Egypt in sponsoring a resolution in the UN Human Rights Council - the odious anti-Western, -U.S. and -Israel organization which the Obama administration recently had this country rejoin. For the first time, America has taken a leading role in promoting an international threat to its citizens' constitutional right to freedom of speech.
As the incalculably important JihadWatch.org's Robert Spencer reported over the weekend: "[The resolution] calls on states to condemn and criminalize ‘any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.'" [Emphasis added.]
Spencer adds: "It also condemns ‘negative stereotyping of religions and racial groups,' which is of course an oblique reference to accurate reporting about the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism - which is always the focus of whining by the Organization of the Islamic Conference and other groups about negative ‘stereotyping' of Islam."
Writing on the left-wing HuffingtonPost.com, blogger Eugene Volokh expresses deep concern about the extent to which such a resolution could translate into a mortal threat to the U.S. Constitution's foundational guarantee of freedom of expression:
I'm worried that the Executive Branch's endorsement of speech-restrictive ‘international human rights' norms will affect how the courts interpret the First Amendment, so that over time, ‘an international norm against hate speech ... [would] supply a basis for prohibiting [hate speech], the First Amendment notwithstanding.' And that worry stems not just from my fevered imagination, but from the views of Prof. Peter Spiro, a noted legal academic who is a supporter of this tendency. That's not fear-mongering on his part, but hope (hope-mongering?) and prediction. So anything that an Administration does to endorse international speech-restrictive norms might well have an effect on our own constitutional rights as well.
Again, the question occurs: "What is Obama thinking?" The fact that his policies are tracking with those of the Muslim Brotherhood and others seeking to promote the supremacist and seditious program authoritative Islam calls Shariah is not news (at least to readers of this column).
What is news, and deeply troubling at that, is the fact that President Obama and his administration are now formalizing this ominous alignment in international forums like the Human Rights Council. According to the past writings of Harold Koh, the former Yale Law School dean who is now the U.S. government's top authority on international law and its application domestically, "norms" like the new Human Rights Council resolution should supercede U.S. laws and even the Constitution.
The Ethics and Public Policy Center's extraordinary Ed Whalen cites a 2004 essay by Koh, entitled "International Law as Part of Our Law," as approvingly setting forth the transnationalist view that "Domestic courts must play a key role in coordinating U.S. domestic constitutional rules with rules of foreign and international law, not simply to promote American aims, but to advance the broader development of a well-functioning international judicial system." Toward this end, Koh believes that, in several circumstances, it is "appropriate for the Supreme Court to construe our Constitution in light of foreign and international law."
The conclusion seems inescapable: In yet another expression of the President's arrogance, he and his administration are in the process of willfully promoting an agenda at odds with not just the Constitution but the larger national interest. Unlike the Chicago Olympics fiasco, however, in the case of "hate speech," it is the American people and Congress that must repudiate him.
Link
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Freedom of expression, Obama, United States
Friday, September 04, 2009
Reporters Without Borders - RSF is outraged by the notion of defamation of religions officially adopted by the UN, by Francis Chartrand
See United Nations - The Commission on Human Rights adopted a resolution condemning the "defamation of religions". Only Islam is specifically mentioned. You will find such explanations on why the resolution adopted March 27 is so disturbing even if it is not binding.
This resolution also reflects a complete moral bankruptcy of the United Nations, which gives more importance to such abstractions as ideologies or religions as human beings.
The concept of defamation of religions officially adopted by the Council for Human Rights United Nations, Reporters Without Borders is outraged.
Reporters Without Borders condemns once again the inability of the Council on Human Rights UN to defend the values enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
"The Council has just deal a severe blow to freedom of expression that is supposed to defend. In passing a resolution that seeks to stifle criticism of Islam, the UN rights body has just shown once again his inability to fight effectively in defense of human rights ", said Reporters Without Borders .
"This resolution is disgraceful. Under the pretext of fighting against discrimination, she blames the media 'are religious symbols and sacred persons'. Especially in the Muslim religion. Clearly, the UN asked the media not to criticize religions, including Islam in the name of the fight against incitement to hatred. It is unacceptable to all those who have at heart to defend freedom of expression and those who fight against discrimination", the organization added.
"The UN is on a dangerous slippery slope for free speech. All freedoms must be defended with equal strength. It is unacceptable that the UN take advantage of if outrageous way to freedom at the expense of another. This goes against all the fundamental principles of this organization", said Reporters Without Borders.
The Council for Human Rights UN meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, voted March 26, 2009, a resolution on the establishment of the agenda of the Durban conference on the fight against racism . The text, submitted by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Conference, was adopted by 23 votes to 11 against (the countries of the European Union, Canada, Chile) and 13 abstentions.
The text urges member states including the United Nations to take action against "hate crimes, discrimination and intimidation resulting from defamation of religions". The document "deplores the use of electronic media, audiovisual and printed matter, including the Internet, for (...) target religious symbols and sacred persons. The resolution also states that the Council of Human Rights is "alarmed by the inaction of some States to combat discriminatory practices and recalls the need for effectively combating defamation of all religions in general and Islam and Muslims in particular. "
Link
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Freedom of expression, Islam, Religion and fanaticism, Reporters without borders, UN
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Extirpate heresy and blasphemy, by Anne Humphreys
We often talk about religion, state religion even when it comes to the government program of mandatory ethics and religious culture - David Mascre and Georges Leroux paraphrasing Tocqueville had also spoken at the trial of Drummondville.
Here, in the same vein, a former candidate of the New Democratic Party (NDP), a law professor at the University of Western Ontario, Robert Ivan Martin, rebelled against a modern inquisition, a thought police whose mission is to root out heresy and blasphemy in Canada. He complains in the same breath that these vagaries are becoming human rights, those rights that people believe they no longer be offended by others.
The English version here (loads slowly).
What is it?
Canadian commissions for human rights
These eleven commissions Canadian Human Rights Commission established by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It is Article 13. (1) it attracts all the wrath of critics.
13. (1) is a discriminatory practice for a person or group of persons acting by agreement, to use or to use a phone repeatedly using or making use of the services of one undertaking from telecommunications under the jurisdiction of Parliament to discuss or address issues likely to expose to hatred or contempt of persons belonging to an identifiable group based on the criteria set out in Article 3.
It is important to note that this is not to punish hate speech here, but the possibility that comments could be interpreted by a quidam so he devised a certain contempt for a group based on race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, for which a pardon has been granted.
Protect the rights of minorities not to be crushed by the majority?
The formulation of the "likely to expose to hatred or contempt" can be interpreted in a very cowardly. Thus, the Canadian Islamic Congress complained in December 2007 with three commissions (Ontario, British Columbia and federal) of 18 articles published in Maclean's in January 2005 to July 2007 that the Canadian Islamic Congress considered deeply Islamophobic. Among the 18 products under investigation are found one entitled "Why the future belongs to Islam".
In an article in the press, journalist Mario Roy wrote on this subject:
"The excerpt from America Alone, published by Maclean's is a largely factual. It aims primarily to demonstrate that Western society is crumbling and that "the future belongs to Islam" from a particular demographic, but also political, psychological and moral. This is a demonstration that has famous precedents: in 1976, in the final fall, the historian and sociologist Emmanuel Todd had predicted, for example, 15 years before the fact and only from demographics, the collapse of Soviet society. In short, those who have read the entire know that America Alone is Mark Steyn, rightly or wrongly, many flights capable of bolder."
"But above all, his presentation is a snapshot - taken at wide angle - the fact that we do not see why it would be censored in a society that likes to say, free speech and open to ideas."
Yet, he was dragged at great expense to the three commissions to justify this article.
The selectivity of the commissions of human rights is also at stake. Thus, in December 2008, the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) has rejected a complaint filed by hate Marc Lebuis, editor of Point de bascule, against a Montreal Salafi imam who believes that homosexuals and Jews spread the mess on Earth and connects shamelessness of non-Muslim women to rape, AIDS, family breakdown and crime.
Reasons given by the CHRC to reject Mr. plainde Lebuis? The majority of references in the book of Imam Salafiste concern the infidels, the unbelievers and women of the West. These categories of people "very broad and diverse", which do not constitute "an identifiable group" under the law. The Commission recognized, however, that some passages from the writings of Mr. Al-Hayiti target identifiable groups such as homosexuals, lesbians, Christians, Jews and non-Muslim women. But the federal agency determines that a specific passages "do not seem to promote hatred or contempt."
Among the contents of these passages (for details see here):
- Homosexuals and lesbians should be "exterminated" that sodomites should be "beheaded".
- Infidels (non Muslims) "live like animals" they are evil people, who worship the evil "they are our enemies" and "that their children are the most perverse." Infidels want to "sexually exploit women" and "one of the worst injustices or ignorance" for Muslims is to consider the infidels as equals.
- Christianity is a religion of lies "responsible" for the evil, corruption and adultery "in the Western world.
- Jews "spreading corruption and chaos on earth.
- Men are "superior" to women "because of their intelligence and memory are more complete [sic]."
- In Muslim countries, Muslims have to "humiliate and punish Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, and should force them to convert to Islam or be killed", etc..
The editor of Point de bascule, a website that denounces the excesses of Islamist ideology, is simply do not. According to him, the decision of the CHRC demonstrates the failure of federal and provincial punish hate speech. "If you are a minority, you can take with impunity hate speech and derogatory to the majority. Standards of tolerance, respect and civility for the majority do not apply to you. If you are a religious minority, you can spread with impunity Suprematist ideology and advocate the extermination of other minorities, and even the majority, if the doctrine of your religion, "says Marc Lebuis.
But no offensive speech from the majority
It all went differently in the case of drinks and the Reverend Father de Valk. In February 2007, Father de Valk Catholic Insight editor (3 500 subscribers) received a letter from the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC). The investigator Sandy Kozak informed that his magazine "was placed under investigation for hate texts" against homosexuals. The Crime of Father de Valk: defending Church teaching on marriage during the debate on gay marriage in Canada, quoting the Bible extensively, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the encyclicals of Pope John Paul II. In other articles, Father de Valk opposition activists in the gay social matter, but according to the Catholic priest, "without addressing the people."
A year later, Catholic Insight had already paid $ 6 000 in legal fees to prepare his defense against the complaint of "hate texts" without even knowing the date of his appearance before the Commission. But there are not fees. De Valk said the Catholic League for Human Rights that his colleague, Tony Gosnach, and himself spent a great time "in this case since the filing of the complaint. "We spend probably three days a week, to two, we keep abreast of what happens on this file".
If Salafi Imam was not prosecuted for his strong against homosexuals, it was not the case of a Council of Knights of Columbus, which in 2005 was fined more than 1 $ 000 by the Commission for Human Rights in British Columbia for their refusal to rent their hall for a couple of lesbians for their wedding.
Five years ago, the Ontario Human Rights Commission had imposed a fine of $ 5 000 to the Protestant printer Scott Brooks for refusing to print letterhead on the theme of homosexuality. The Court of Human Rights condemned Saskatchewan Hugh Owans to thousands of dollars in fines for citing verses from the Bible in a letter to the local newspaper. And Mayor Diane Haskett in London, Ontario, was fined $ 10 000 plus interest for failing to declare a day of Gay Pride.
In 2002, the Commission of human rights in Saskatchewan have had the Saskatoon Star Phoenix and Hugh Owens to each pay $ 1 500 for three complainants have issued three advertisements that cited biblical verses condemning homosexuality. This decision was reversed by an appellate court, but four years later.
A few months ago, a Christian pastor, the Rev. Stephen Boissoin was sentenced to life can not express anything "offensive" against homosexuals. Nothing "hateful", or even something defined by law as "incitement to hatred". Simply a negative review. A pastor can no longer preach sermons on sexuality.
Commissions of human rights: a travesty of justice
Not only the criteria for selection of committees for human rights are variable according to the group of plaintiffs and the targeted group, but the rules of procedure and structure of commissions for human rights do not traditional rules of procedural fairness:
- third parties to the alleged offenses can still join in the request and complaint.
- The commissions have sometimes allowed the plaintiffs access to records of them and leading the investigation.
- Truth is not a defense.
- The accused can not always confront their accusers.
- Norms to ensure the validity of evidence do not apply.
- The hearsay evidence is allowed.
- The government funds the accusers, the accused must defend himself at his own expense.
- The accusers can not be condemned to pay the costs if they lose.
(Reviews presented by the National Post article "A bit late for introspection" on 19 June 2008.)
Not surprisingly with such rules of procedure that the CHRC is very effective: in 32 years of existence, not an accused person has been found innocent. Even Mark Steyn and Maclean's were not innocent. After a big hype in Canada around this case, the Canadian Commission dismissed the complaint after ruling that there was no need to ask the Tribunal to investigate the case.
Maclean's and Steyn were brought before two other committees, for the same articles by the same students, those from British Columbia and Ontario, whose intervention framework is modeled on their federal cousins. These two appeals were also rejected after a very costly mobilization of a battery of lawyers and officials. All this for an article that was not hateful, but rigorous and factual, while certainly controversial and undoubtedly offensive to some.
Not guilty, but acquitted because famous?
The Ontario Commission stated that it refused to accept the request because the code of personal law of Ontario "does not to the Commission the jurisdiction to deal with the content of magazine articles by the complaints process." In its statement, the Committee took the opportunity to condemn morally Maclean's and Mark Steyn because "it has a more extensive right to express their views on issues that are brought to its attention and which have implications in perspective of human rights."
The Ontario commission after saying it regretted not being able to continue and restrict freedom of expression of Maclean's and Mark Steyn claimed a sacrosanct "dialogue" now made all the sauces: "This will include d 'take [the Commission] a leadership that will foster discussion and dialogue between individuals and organizations interested in the issues raised by Islamophobia in the media and the means by which the Commission, the media and of others can begin to solve them. "It is likely that, as is often the case when a government talks about" dialogue ", it is unidirectional and is more akin to a series of sermons that an exchange of ideas that can change their ideas bureaucrats.
The Commission continued by saying "concerned by the fact that since September 2001, Islamophobic attitudes are becoming more prevalent in society and that Muslims are increasingly the target of intolerance, including a lack of desire 'look for some accommodation of their religious beliefs and practices.
Unfortunately, the Maclean's article and others like it illustrate that. In describing Muslims as all sharing the same negative characteristics, including being a threat to "the West", this explicit expression of Islamophobia further perpetuates and promotes prejudice towards Muslims and other groups. An extreme example of this is a discussion on a blog on the item that was brought to the attention of the Commission which, among other things, required the killing, deportation or conversion of Muslim Canadians."
And now, the extreme example is the interpretation made by a blog that has no connection with Maclean's and Mark Steyn and he was charged last two. Can we complain to the Canadian Commission for logic?
At the end of the rejection of appeals against him and Maclean's, Steyn has criticized human rights commissions in Canada in these terms "They did not like the pressure that accompanied the case. The lives of these commissions was quiet: they cheerfully punishing people insignificant that no one had ever heard, while accumulating a bizarre case that reversed the principles of our traditional law and nobody worried. When these commissions were under the spotlight in the case of Maclean's, their mock judge rushed to the exit."
Ezra Levant - The process is the punishment
On 11 January 2008, Ezra Levant, publisher of a conservative news magazine, the Western Standard, was interrogated for 90 minutes by a representative of the Alberta government. His crime? Have reproduced the Danish cartoons of Mohammed to illustrate a news article. He was accused of "discrimination" and called before the Commission des droits de l'homme "of Alberta to be interviewed.
Alberta taxpayers have paid more than 500 000% for this survey, which mobilized for up to 900 days almost fifteen (15) bureaucrats on the Commission for Human Rights in Alberta then qu'Ezra Levant and his magazine paid 100 000%.
As Ezra Levant said, the process is the punishment of the system: it is long, very expensive, the defendant always pays his pocket even if he is innocent, the accuser does not pay a penny, the rules of Traditional law does not apply, even if what the defendant said is true, it can still be convicted.
Mr. Levant, including the magazine went bankrupt in the wake of the publication of the cartoons, says its misadventures - and those of companions in misfortune - in the hands of the commission on human rights in his new book Shakedown.
Richard Warman, professional accuser and former employee of the CHRC
It should be here still talk about Richard Warman, the accuser professional CHRC.
Favorite tactic of Richard Warman: to pass on the Internet for a racist and then accuse the site that displays his comments as racist.
In early 2008, this former employee of the CHRC has gone in search of open wireless connections in Ottawa so that he could post racist comments under different pseudonyms on sites allegedly racist and then complain to acknowledge the CHRC and the owner of these sites to be a racist! Whenever Warman spoke to the CHRC, he has won and cashed in a tidy sum for damages. Nice scam. Meanwhile, poor pear which left her open connection saw his name mentioned in the open court, then in the newspapers, as the author of the racist comments.
To learn more about Richard Warman, read the site devoted to it.
The Canadian Human Rights Commission says it will reform itself
Commissions of human rights seem to be gone too far. They have faced them as talented journalists Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn and the largest news magazine in Canada. Since then, the criticisms against them are constantly in English Canada (Quebec, a haven of political complacency correctivas is not interested in this issue).
In 2008, the CHRC has asked a law professor at the University of Windsor Richard Moon to prepare a report on the mandate of the CHRC and section 13 of the Law on Human Rights. In November 2008, Moon has released its report which recommends that section 13 be repealed so that prosecutions for hate speech are no longer clear that the criminal law where the rules of law are guaranteed.
According to Moon, "the use of censorship by the government must be limited to a very narrow category of extremist views that threaten, recommend or justify violence against members of an identifiable group."
Following the tabling of the report Moon, Commissioner (Mark Steyn writes, "Commissar" on Soviet) Chief of the Canadian Human Rights, Jennifer Lynch, was prepared to modify the application of the Article 13.1, but opposed its repeal and submitted its own report in which it recommends specifying what legally constitutes a hate on the Internet and not always condemn the accused (even innocent) to pay the costs.
In an article in the Globe and Mail June 12, Ms. Lynch said it had tabled its report in order to feed a "balanced debate". The same day, the television channel CTV had been invited to debate with Ezra Levant on the human rights commissions out Powerplay, an issue very well attended. Ms. Lynch that fit? She refused to talk with Mr. Levant, then tried to do désinviter. When it does not work, she sent one of his cute (a Mr. Dufresne) with strict instructions: to talk to the same issue before Mr. Levant, and not to discuss with him. This is a balanced dialogue.
Kathy Shaidle summarizes this "debate" in this way: "The Official Censor of Canada is trying to censor a televised debate on censorship."
(See Issue Powerplay in question here.)
As we saw at the beginning of this money, a federal parliamentary committee is currently working on Article 13.1 of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Should we abolish as many recommend?
This is obviously not agree with Jennifer Lynch. It reacted violently to this criticism at the conference (15 June 2009) CASHRA, the Association of defense of human rights.
The National Post published an article about a page that reproduces excerpts from his speech and dissects.
Ms. Lynch accuses "Critics of the system of human rights to manipulate and represent information in a false light work of committees to promote their point of view, ie that the commissions and courts human rights are no longer anything. "
As the National Post points out, "said that these committees have outlived their usefulness and no longer fulfill their original mission is a perfectly legitimate argument. It is clear that Ms. Lynch did not agree, but it does not deem it in the final. Mais on peut la pardonner de le penser. But it can be forgiven for thinking. Indeed, the CHRC is usually both investigator, prosecutor and judge when it deals with complaints against racism and hate speech. In addition, the Commission decides what constitutes hatred printed or spoken. It is therefore not surprising that Ms. Lynch would not understand why it should tolerate those who want to stop the commission of human rights. In his daily work, it can get rid of those who disagree with it by defining their words as hateful, so why could not do it in a public debate about the rights of citizens and those that should protected?"
In Ottawa, the committee continues to address the human rights commissions in Canada.
Testimony of Mr. Langtry of the CHRC and Mr. Borovoy of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Labels: Anne Humphreys, Canada, Freedom of expression
Monday, May 11, 2009
Informal letter to the address of Mr. Francis Chartrand, by Gilles Merlot
Saint-Eustache,
April 26 09,
Mister Francis Chartrand
With frankness and honesty that I inform you, on my behalf, Gilles Merlot, a grouping of citizens of Saint-Eustache has taken the lead in organizing a boycott against you, Mr. Francis Chartrand. We prefer that we do not come here, but you have upset many, entering the school, be it 3 years ago or recently.
The boycott will specifically support your department Maxi Saint-Eustache, as well as partnerships in which you are engaged in the public schools of the Commission scolaire de la Seigneurie des Mille-Îles.
We have tried repeatedly to end off your juveniles actions in politics, but in vain, you do to your head. We know that you have obtained several contracts with several schools to hold workshops for information, news, journalism and politics, workshops for social involvement, political and judicial theater workshops and improvisation and recently, workshops medieval role-playing and fantasy.
You presentedyourselfs with the 2006 federal election under the banner of the New Democratic Party in the riding of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. Shortly after, in the edition of L'Éveil, 13 May 2006 that I have carefully, you are publishing an article saying that the NDP association of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles was against Bill C - 127 which was to raise the age of consent for sexual relations from 14 to 16 years.
In the article, you did mention 2 young students of Polyvalente Deux-Montagnes, every both aged of 15 at the time of publication of the article, while demonstrating a sense of revolt or voluntary detachment face the authority you are appealing: "The sexual consent remains in its own right for many people, a personal decision. The teenager younger than 14 years concludes that the transition between childhood and adolescence, most do not yet possess the maturity required to engage in a such experience. But in fact, after 14 years old they should have the right to practice the experience because, through contact with the education, independence and maturity once evolved, they know what they embark."
"Annie-Joelle Constantin Lortie and Raphaëlle Dubois-Beauchamps, both students at Polyvalente Deux-Montagnes, have the full support of Francis Chartrand, the NDP candidate in the last federal election in Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, which the latter was involved and street worker at the Café de la Paix, Saint-Eustache. He wants to be remembered that inform young people in all honesty and wisdom so that they can flourish in their lives. Raising the age of consent will only launch a message to young people from very authoritarian with a projection as what they are improperly monitored for the remainder of his adolescence and more that some benefit to increasing marginality, already present in our society. He is convinced that young people can manage the issue with responsibility and prefer to benefit young people aware of the hyper-sexualization in the elements of our everyday culture and its cultural products, because there is a plan for the youth of 'today."
You were well written "because there is a plan for the youth of today", because a week later, this article was included in La Presse and Le Journal de Montreal as part of an event in Montreal against the bill, and the following Saturday, May 20 2006, 2 teenage girls, Ms. Constantine-Lortie and Miss Dubois-Beauchamps on your side had declared on air of the Grand Journal de TQS: "We are 15 years old, our breasts and our vaginas, we do whatever we want with." And you had commended the development of their bodies and their sexual development, property acquired and developed over the years, in front of the camera, you, a guy of 23 years old. I was ashamed for you.
Then the months passed, and several other events were held in the Saint-Eustache and Deux-Montagnes, including one in Deux-Montagnes in Olympia Park, where you dared send young show, especially young girls Secondary I to V of the PDM in light attire, from 13 to 17 years, which police Deux-Montagnes told me over the phone. At least you have had the OK from the police to demonstrate. But the girls that you took were cut, my time, very provocative. What message do you send out to voters and for what purpose? Allow even more debauchery in schools? Does it give you more volunteers in the next election by supporting their lawlessness and debauchery?
Then comes the school where the last weekend of August (the first weekend after school starts), 26 and 27 August, when you held another event both Polyvalente Deux-Montagnes that at the Youth Freedom School, where young people have decided to scan in favor of lowering the age of consent for sexual relations from 14 to 13 years, which other sources say it was 12 years or at the beginning of the first secondary cycle.
To the scene to answer questions from journalists following the slippage at the École Liberté-Jeunesse, you said to 4 TV channels: "Today is my hand on a shoulder that I file a generation which is indoctrinated and abused, who lied a false Maternal. Look at them, they know what they do, they know the media, they know their culture, they are not uneducated, and just like me, as intelligent they are, they have Puritanism far in the ass. Exploring sexuality and is practiced at puberty. Not before, not after. So young, to rebellion! Yes, the revolt, the revolution! Yesterday, May 1968, Paris, Brussels, today, August 2006, Deux-Montagnes, Sainte-Marthe!"
And the final nail in June 2007, as in July and August 2006, in Sainte-Marthe-sur-le-lac, always at the École Liberté-Jeunesse, a car wash to fund "extracurricular and juveniles activities" was organized by the Young New Democrats, which was attended by boys and girls between 12 and 17 years in swimsuits and sometimes topless. The goal was (and more, you have admitted in local newspapers) to fund youth conferences and a trip for a demonstration against Bill C-127 to Ottawa in July 2007.
The result: more than 400 young Basses-Laurentides aged 12 to 17 years who have shown for two days on Parliament Hill, distributing political pamphlets taste: "Informaction" "Manifestaction" "Agitaction" "Masturbaction" or even "Profanaction", all with young speedoo in bikini, cargo shorts, with bare chest and even lingerie.
Although it has happened in the rule of art and in compliance, the event "for the right to fuck without any authority from the age of 14 or 13 or 12" has been true for a laughing stock in the face of politicians and MPs, and a real shame for us, people of the region of the Basses-Laurentides. In September 2007, Bill C-127 passed by the Parliament: 237 votes for, 16 against.
It is all very well to show a disagreement about policy or the company, it must be assumed as the company, because charity begins at home itself.
The height of your pride is going to deny your fault in the rejection of your application for the federal election of 2008. You announced by the media shortly before Christmas that you had learned the new through the newspapers on Sunday 16 December 2007, while in January, we learned another new, as what you have been replaced against your will, but that you were informed by telephone by the leadership of the NDP in Quebec, November 22.
The version of January is challenged, even by friends and family, since it is impossible for November 22 to December 16, whether you are aware of your foreclosure without you "climb" in the curtains in all media, proud as you are. Your version of 22 November, and that is what I believe is a phone call from the leadership of the NDP in Quebec you saying that you had internal problems to solve various business in the region of Lower Laurentides in public outings incurred by your colleagues, including in your secular statement.
What about the point of your statement secular, your position on reasonable accommodations, 31 January 2007, while you attack the religious fundamentalists all over the place: Christians, Jews and Muslims. However you attack racism: "But after some requests and complaints from ethnic or religious groups, considered by the media and mass as excessive, intrusive and sometimes against the values and achievements of Quebecers, and which sometimes have struck the freedom of certain individuals, including many groups of women, unconnected with the groups in question, the term "reasonable accommodation" has acquired a pejorative connotation often, sometimes threatening to see some legacies of Quebec."
"We must add that since 2006, the term is abused. Thus, several media have described as a measure of reasonable accommodation that the windows of an exercise room where trained women in tee-shirt and shorts, have been frosted at the request of a group Hassidic Jews."
"Other actions more disturbing, as Sainte-Thérèse, where nurses had to wear long sleeves and long pants in the workplace even during heat waves, as demand from a group of Hassidic Jews in Boisbriand."
"Then some people will recall that in September, in some secondary schools the Basses-Laurentides, a tour of various organizations such as Chastity Quebec, and many fundamentalist groups creating the" isolation "of women in the workplace and in family life."
"And finally the case of a secondary school in Lanaudière will be shocked an entire community in the vicinity of Sainte-Julienne, where the school is in a position of "reasonable accommodation" when asked a serious restructuring the dress code of the school after a religious evangelist whom only 2.4% of students are members, in the flatter excuse to keep the "boys of the community" in the right path of chastity away from the Vice the temptation of the flesh pleasure."
"After all these cases listed, why do we have imposed 95% of the secular population to 5% of religious fundamentalists, whatever the religion, some process changes? Like me, many people will not lock up their wife or their daughters in the wardrobe to the whims of some verses of psalms or whatever religious book."
"We must maintain our tolerance for multiculturalism and diversity, and not fall into the trap of racism and fundamentalism. But the religious fundamentalism in Canada has no place."
Let watch two debates chosen by you in 2006 and 2007, youth sexuality and reasonable accommodations, your pride or self-centered, sex life of children and intolerance of the faith of others. But is not this a valid reason to replace you at your candidate? What interest is there to have a candidate who talks about the sex lives of children and intolerance of the faith of others?
While at the previous election, you were talking about wind energy in a wind corridor from Lachute to Saint-Eustache (he spent 2.3 million in government studies), you talk about fighting local poverty, d 'addition of specialist doctors at the Center Hospitalier Saint-Eustache, to repatriate Canadians soldiers in Afghanistan, to counter the Israeli strikes on Lebanon.
What are you doing today? You go into schools as last year in 2008, using public funds to harangue youth organizing medieval role-playing and fantasy with the New Wars and Quests, whereas last year you go into schools to promote the libertinism and intellectual anarchy again and again using the public funds by sending a bill ranging from $ 68 to $ 125 for one hour workshop teaching and extracurricular activities for my children and my nephews and nieces attend these schools.
You support a radical youth in Quebec and Canada. While some died laughing face of the ambition of your goals, you can still do much to damage within the education system, as to the stability of many families in the region.
Asked repeatedly last year about the destructive consequences and impact of your activities, you do adds to the arrogance of your brand: "If you do not want that I interfere in the education of your children, you n 'had to do it yourself because I have to return back to you to redo all my wishes, my advantage, my ambition. With all that made me suffer and what I lost, I've got nothing to lose and I take every opportunity of life to feed my revenge. Nothing escapes me."
Again on 22 February, the RCMP to let you know that you were indicted for 29 counts of incitement to hatred and religious desecration. Last December, you have taken 3 phone on the radio, in response to the rejection of a complaint by a journalist from Montreal to the Canadian Human Rights Commission following the declaration as an imam who kill women, gays and atheists is not a crime.
Like me, you were mad with rage that the Commission is well and truly treated the journalist as racist and insensitive. In interview with Stéphane Gendron, Benoît Dutrizac and Pierre Maisonneuve, you said this: "Listen, you have a guy, for example, of sound mind, fine, nice, lucid, which has all its head, any health mental balance, what is an atheist, believer or practicing (whatever) and who knows when to stop on the question of religion, the worse is next to an atomic bomb or hydrogen, well this guy is less dangerous than crazy religious fanatic with a submachine gun."
Like your fan club (http://francischartrand-independent.blogspot.com/) and (http://atheisme.ca/), I do not see the desecration of religion, but with all that you represent one side and the other in "I would rather be a fucking lumberjack with a beaver hat than being kneeling in front of the Plateau" you say: "I hoped very much that the 72 virgins Allah offered by the 3 martyrs shot that Julie Surprenant Provencher and Cedric are not there, to be sure to not make a blow job" in response to piracy which he suffered.
Later, you have taken a more violent tone: "It made me think when the sister of one of my colleagues saw Ben Musovsky and Kyle Trudel of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce-Lachine, and they do not hindered to treat guests in their own house, of "sals racist" , "sals cons suburban" , "Residents of 450 to exterminate" and even "cursed Quebecois against Sharia" , when did the salissage against me even at the doors of former members of the county."
"We tried to scare Quebecers County Rivière-des-Mille-Îles that they were opposed to Sharia, it would be bad for them. "
"It threatens people in their quiet even in August. And these bastards were traced, Ben Musovsky and Kyle Trudel live at Notre-Dame-de-Grâce, Ben is on Monkland while Kyle is on Cavendish."
"Terrorize suburban Quebecers who have worked all their lives of hard work, is the behavior of some New Democrats demagogues kneeling in front of the Plateau, sprinkled a four-five-zero-phobia from Jean Leloup, the select club by Jack Layton and his band of monkeys Islamists, who have guardianship all candidates from the NDP out of Montreal, kneeling before forcibly Yvonne Ridley, a occidentophobe Islamic who conferences which is against our country, against our province, against our cultural heritage, and we must listen, even in Montreal."
"Is there someone willing to take up arms if the pro-life or pro-minorities come to us as the best women in small ads from l'Agence Énergétique du Québec? Because if it ever tries to brainwash in my own living room, I shoot at close range, and too bad if the organizers baveux and anti-Quebec Laoun in Bourassa fags or anti-450 Mulcair in Outremont or lyncheurs of fags Manitoba, it is values, but too bad for those who will be in front of my gun, if I threatened once more in my free peace of homo sapiens square mognon, I draw And I kill."
"Please ignore the words above, they are misogynistic and violent. I was hacked. Hahaha!"
On 25 January on the killings in Belgium: "But finally, when will we understand that a disturbed, it remains disturbed. It is confirmed, the patient in Belgium, had an opening file whose psychiatric 4 times the Crown had asked for a serious réencadrement see internment."
"Well no, must be tolerant of our social deficient, they must be brought into society, we must let them adapt. Here, let it play with your children, he will learn quickly, you see. No, no sir, I assure you it does not re-offend his penis to show to your children, despite the eight rape previously committed by him for 10 years."
"Bullshit, nonsense like this that we are responding in all the NGOs working for the integration of the mentally deficient and social. I grant you, you can not blame these groups to have a little bit of love for our case of "mental health", even me I have compassion for them, and I have always condemned any mental and physical abuse made against them in a psychiatric institute. They are human like us. But we can blame the NGOs, but not widespread, cases of willful blindness, on behalf of integration and tolerance."
"It's beautiful, the diversity of Mr Mrs everyone dancing around the rainbow. That's what it is, tolerance of stupidity, it seems that no official of the tolerance of the diversity of mental illness, had a child or motherfucker stabbed by a "reinstated" in society. I ass full of "socially unfit", worse, I have full ass of those who do not supervise them, and we call in the street, 3 blocks of a school. "
See, still face intolerance ... pedophiles in social reintegration, people in mental health, while you defend access to the "meat" 3 years ago. Things that members of the grouping of citizens of Saint-Eustache do not get, especially when you mention "tolerance of stupidity", while you defend in person 3 years ago that a girl or a boy of 14 years old could have sex, heterosexual or homosexual, with a person ... of 33. Bullshit, nonsense like this that we are responding, when asked what are your beliefs.
Today you are on parole and probation pending your trial. This is unfortunate, but if you had submitted a much better attention and greater wisdom before you do anything with schools and public relations, we would not be made to this degree it dawns on you that a file may Criminal and civil and / or prison.
We are more than a hundred, yes, we have a large impact on benefits to your branch, and we do not want to, but we are parents, and me personally, I have four children 12, 14, 20 and 27 years old and I have 8 nieces and nephews from 2 to 16 years old. They all live in the region of Saint-Eustache, Deux-Montagnes and Ste-Thérèse. I don't want that my children have access to your activities anymore.
On the other hand, we also boycott school activities, extracurricular and educational as you have in the public schools of the Commission scolaire de la Seigneurie des Mille-Îles. We also call to boycott all meetings and rallies all what they are, because we try to educate our children away specimens like you, and we have the support of 2 parents committees.
We will stop the boycott when you get back, stopped your juvenile political indoctrination as well as your role-playing with Eric Sarrazin, who are more or less questionable character field, which also tries to indoctrinate youth.
We apologize for any consequences that this may cause.
Make sure Accept my best regards.
Sincerely,
Gilles Merlot
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Freedom of expression, Gilles Merlot
Friday, May 01, 2009
Shut up, otherwise you will harm our false harmony, by Marie-Eve Marineau
This kind of initiative, always initially built on good intentions, invariably ends up being transformed into monstrous Commission for the Propagation of Virtue and Suppression of Vice led forces islamoleftists ... We see Canada, where the commissions of human rights authorities are custodians of property and threaten democracy and our freedoms. We saw in Quebec with the astonishing document attached to the Bouchard-Taylor Report recommended that the media are at the service of Utopia Wellness and the Harmony total ... and everyone around, let's sing Kumbaya!
Australia will implement the mandatory Internet censorship
Australia added to China as a country which implements the mandatory censorship of the Internet, under a program developed by the federal government.
These revelations came out when the giant U.S. technology, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo and a coalition of advocacy groups for human rights and other groups unveiled a code of conduct to protect freedom of expression and privacy on the Internet.
The government said it will not allow Internet users have the option to withdraw from the proposed national internet filter.
The program was initially conceived as a way to fight against child pornography and adult content, but it could be extended to include controversial websites on euthanasia or anorexia.
Communications Minister Stephen Conroy revealed the mandatory censorship to the Senate committee on estimates, while the Global Network Initiative, which brings together major corporations, organizations, human rights, academics and investors have asked technology companies to commit themselves to "protect freedom of expression and the right to privacy of their users."
Mr. Conroy said that tests should be made, but "we are talking about mandatory blocking, where possible, of illegal content."
The proposal for "Net Nanny" was originally offered to Australians who wanted uncensored access to the Web can contact their ISP to be excluded from this service.
Human Rights Watch has condemned internet censorship, and argued the U.S. Senate that "there is a real danger of a Virtual Curtain dividing the internet, just as the Iron Curtain had done during the Cold War because some governments fear the potential of the Internet, and want to control it. "
Groups including the System Administrators Guild of Australia and Electronic Frontiers Australia have attacked the proposal, saying it unfairly restrict Australians' access to the Web, it would slow the speed of the Internet and increase the price of access to Internet.
Colin Jacob, a board member of EFA, said the filter had little effect on illegal content on the Internet, including child pornography, because it would not cover file-sharing networks.
"If the government clearly announced that it intends to target only pornography, it would be a whole other debate," he said.
The initiative of technology companies, which follows criticism that companies were working to censorship of the Internet in countries such as China, requires them to narrowly interpret requests for information or censorship government and to fight for their collaboration reduce to a minimum.
The initiative provides a systematic approach to "work together to resist efforts by governments that seek to mobilize companies in acts of censorship and surveillance that violate international standards", said participants.
In a statement, co-founder and president of Yahoo, Jerry Yang welcomed the new code of conduct.
"These principles provide a valuable roadmap for companies like Yahoo operating in markets where freedom of expression and privacy are unfairly restricted," he said.
"Yahoo was founded on the belief that promoting access to information can enrich people's lives, and the principles we unveil today reflect our determination that our actions match our values around the world" .
Yahoo has been propelled to the forefront the issue of online rights after the Californian company has helped Chinese police identify cyber dissidents whose supposed crime was expressing their views online.
China exercises strict control over the Internet, it blocks sites linked to Chinese dissidents, the outlawed spiritual movement Falun Gong, the Tibetan government in exile and those with information about the 1989 massacre at Tiananmen.
A number of U.S. companies, including Microsoft, Cisco, Google and Yahoo, have been dragged before the U.S. Congress in recent years and accused of complicity in building the "Great Wall Chinese Firewall."
The Australian Christian Lobby, however, has hosted the program with satisfaction.
The Executive Director Jim Wallace said that such measures were necessary. "The need to prevent access to content and coarse child pornography must be placed above the desire of industry to see unrestricted access," said Wallace.
The Committee to Protect Journalists has published a list of 10 worst countries in the world for bloggers. The Internet culture is expanding in several countries in Asia and the Middle East, resulting in an aggressive crackdown by some governments. Three of these countries are members of Consel Human Rights of the United Nations, China, Cuba and Egypt.
"Bloggers are the vanguard of the information revolution and the number is growing," said CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon. "But governments have got to turn the technology against bloggers by censorship, restrictions on Internet access and retrieval of personal information. When all else fails, the authorities simply throw a few bloggers in prison for intimidating the rest of the Internet community and force them into silence or self-censorship."
Here is the list of the worst predators of freedom of expression online:
1. Burma
2. Iran
3. Syria
4. Cuba
5. Saudi Arabia
6. Vietnam
7. Tunisia
8. China
9. Turkmenistan
10. Egypt
IRAN: A Nation Of Bloggers from ayrakus on Vimeo.
Labels: Freedom of expression, Marie-Êve Marineau, Religion and fanaticism
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]