Majorityrights Central > Category: Free Speech

My thanks to Micheal R for this link, an article by the near-libertarian Jewish-Russian-American blogger Eugene Volokh.

Richard Warman, a lawyer who worked as an investigator for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, often filed complaints against “hate speech” sites — complaints that were generally upheld under Canadian speech restrictions. Fromm, a defender of various Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites, has been publicly condemning Warman for, among other things, being “an enemy of free speech.” Warman sued, claiming that these condemnations are defamatory.

Friday, the Ontario Superior Court held for Warman — chiefly on the grounds that because Warman’s claims were accepted by the legal system, they couldn’t accurately be called an attack on free speech. Thus, for instance:

  [25] The implication, as well as the clear of meaning of the words [“an enemy of free speech” and “escalated the war on free speech”], is that the plaintiff is doing something wrong. The comment “Well, see your tax dollars at work” also implies that Mr. Warman misused public funds for this “war on free speech”.

  [26] The plaintiff was using legal means to complain of speech that he alleged was “hate” speech.

  [27] The evidence was that Mr. Warman was successful in both the complaint and a libel action which he instituted.

  [28] Freedom of expression is not a right that has no boundaries. These parameters are outlined in various legislative directives and jurisprudence. I find Mr. Fromm has exceeded these. This posting is defamatory.

Likewise, apropos another statement (“Since then, a number of dissidents have been dragged before human rights tribunals, largely through the efforts of CHRC hatchetman Richard Warman”), the court responds:

  [32] While opposition to legislation is permitted, it is defamatory to say that Mr. Warman is largely responsible for “dragging” dissidents before the human rights tribunal, when in fact the “dissidents” were disseminating prohibited hate speech. The tribunal upheld the complaint. This posting is also defamatory.

Likewise, here’s another statement that the court treated as defamatory and legally punishable:

  [48] At the press conference after Mr. Fromm’s comments, he introduced three other people who spoke of their “problems with Richard Warman.” Mr. Fromm added, after one speaker:

      Thank you very much, Jason. So, for posting an opinion, the same sort of opinion that might have appeared in editorial pages in newspapers across this country, Jason and the Northern Alliance, his site has come under attack and people who are just ordinary Canadians find themselves in front of the courts for nothing more serious than expressing their opinion. This is being done with taxpayers’ money. I find that reprehensible.

  [49] In one posting Mr. Fromm describes Mr. Warman’s “campaign of intimidation” recitingvarious actions taken by Mr. Warman. He states that freedom of the Internet was the key issue.

  [50] Again Mr. Warman was referred to as acting like a one-man thought police agency.

  [51] The plaintiff is accused of using taxpayer money to “restrict freedom of speech” and of refusing “to allow those with differing opinions the right to express their views.”

  [52] The tone of all these allegations is derisive and holds the plaintiff up to ridicule and contempt. The words themselves and the inferences to be drawn are all defamatory.

Likewise, the court says, “[59] Mr. Warman is criticized for his anti-hate speech stance, and his professionalism and integrity are attacked. This would lead a reasonable reader to conclude that the plaintiff was an ideologue who wanted only to deny freedom of speech to those with whom he disagrees. [60 ]I find this posting defamatory.”

READ MORE...

Oxford Unite Against Fascism, Oxford University Student Union, Oxford & District Trades Council, Oxford University Labour Club, Oxfordshire UNISON Health, Oxford Brookes University Unison branch and Unite Against Fascism have called a peaceful demonstration against fascist BNP leader Nick Griffin and Holocaust denier David Irving who are due to speak in the free speech form [sic] on Monday 26th November at the Oxford Union.

... Fascism threatens the safety of Black, Jewish, Muslim, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people of Oxford including students and academics. Wherever fascists are active or have a presence, racist attacks and other hate crimes increase.

For transport/coach details, please contact National UAF office ...

So ran the instructions to the thousand freaks, self-haters, simple minds and Jewish and “BEM” activists who screamed and occasionally became violent outside the Oxford Union Free Speech Forum last night.  How far we have come from the “rainbow coalition” invented by Ken Livingstone in his GLC administration of the early 80s.  Now the heir to this poisonous confection dictates acceptable speech and even debate about acceptable speech.

Anyhow, let’s get a flavour of what it was like inside the building.

Simon Darby of the BNP managed to record part of Nick Griffin’s speech - albeit, apparently, by employing technology no more effective than the wax disc.  You can hear it, complete with the baying mob without, and a heartening round of applause from Griffin’s audience to finish, here.

Griffin spoke in a separate room from Irving, who was in the main debating chamber.  The mob had made it impossible for some of the ticket-holders to access the latter.  So the police, who don’t seem to have been especially effective, ushered them to another room.  The speakers were split accordingly.

READ MORE...