By Dalwhinnie
Conducted by Bruce Bawer, author of “While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within“:
http://www.rights.no/publisher/publisher.asp?id=59&tekstid=3259
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
By Dalwhinnie
Pay attention people. This is vitally important. Imagine the leader of a rising political party in Canada being put on trial by the government for anti-Islamic statements.
Geert Wilders is the Dutch politician who is saying Islam is violent. He is on trial in the Netherlands right now. Read all about it.
My recent conversations with European lefties in various forums have convinced me that Europe is far gone into cultural dissolution.
By Dalwhinnie
2009 has been considered a bad year for many; for me it was a year of triumphs. The forces of evil have been turned back internationally and domestically on two decisive fronts: free speech, vigorous nationalism, and climate change.
Free speech
The campaign waged by Ezra Levant in Canada against the speech control fanatics at Human Rights Commissions has been successful. The blogosphere rose in defence of Ezra but he made it work, by patiently devoting himself to de-legitiizing them. Later, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench joined in the de-legitimization by roundly castigating the idiotic decision of Lori Andreachuk, the Alberta Human Rights Commissioner in the Stephen Boisson case.
Vigorous Nationalism
The nationalist cultural policy first came to light in the Herouxville Declaration, a statement made in 2007 by a small Quebec town’s aldermen and mayor that this is a Christian country, we eat pigs and we don’t treat our women like slaves. If you read it, you will find it surprizingly liberal in tone, but it appeared at a time when it was considered dangerous and provocative to herald Canadian social values, so uptight had everyone become with Muslim cultural intimidation.
By Dalwhinnie
The issue is: why is there a law available by which these people could be prosecuted? Why is a domestic spat in a hotel the source of criminal prosecution?
“Explaiing his reasons for dismissing the case, he said Mrs Tazi’s claim that she was verbally attacked by the couple for up to an hour had not been borne out by other prosecution witnesses, who suggested that any discussions lasted around seven minutes.”
By Dalwhinnie
George Jonas is Canada’s premier political intellectual. He is old and has a weak voice, so his speech (above) is being read by another. His distinctions between ambitions and rights should be embedded in the mind of every responsible citizen. His battle with statism is never-ending.
His analysis is entirely consistent with that of Brian Lee Crowley’s Fearful Symmetry: The Fall and Rise of Canada’s Founding Values. I suspect that Crowley may offer a more hopeful view of the future.
By Dalwhinnie
As reported in the Brussels Journal.
The EU is intent upon enacting legislation in the style of the Canadian Human Rights Act and its provincial counterparts. An offensive environment is created when I think your comment is offensive.
“Harassment, as vaguely defined in the directive, allows an individual to accuse someone of discrimination merely for expressing something the individual allegedly perceives as creating an “offensive environment.” The definition is so broad that anyone who feels intimidated or offended can easily bring legal action against those whom he feels are responsible. Moreover, the directive shifts the burden of proof onto the accused, who has to prove the negative, i.e. demonstrate that he or she did not create an environment which intimidated or offended the complainant. If the accused fails to do so, he or she can be sentenced to paying an unlimited amount of compensation for “harassment.” ”
Fortunately, it will need the approval of all 27 member states to pass.The article was first reported here at the Hudson Institute website.
By Dalwhinnie
http://ezralevant.com/2009/09/chrc-investigates-richard-warm.html
Ishtar 17, 4395 of the 12th year of the Glorious Reign of Gruppenfuhrer Louis XVI
Memo to the Supreme Council
For decision
from Department of Subversion, Supreme Council, Galactic Racially Aryan Supremacy Party (GRASP)
My Lords:
Agent 117 has been exposed, as you are no doubt aware . His usefulness is nearly over, but as a matter of policy I think the Council sould promote him to the rank of Unteroffizier and give him a medal (I suggest the Silver Swastika with Oak Leaf Clusters) before he is disgraced and fined by the local emanation of the Dark Side. When he has returned to us, he can get his back pay from the date of his condemnation.
Such measures may seem generous. Some other Bureaus of the Supreme Council (Treasury and Public Works) consider that Agent 117 has not completely succeeded yet. However most department heads agree with this recommendation. Staff considers that his mission has been wildly successful, and recommends promotion, medal and back pay.
Director BuSub
By Dalwhinnie
A major blow was struck at the basis of Canadian hate speech controls by this judgment of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
In the Human Rights Tribunal decision of Athansios Hadjis, the Tribunal has ruled that the constitutionality of section 13(1) of the Human Rights Act is in grave doubt, and refused to find Lemire guilty on that basis. The specific extension of the hate-speech prohibition to the Internet was contained in section 13(2), adopted by Parliament in 2001.
The Commissioner found that the measure (suppression of free speech in the way section 13 envisages) was disproportionate, in that it was not a minimal impairment of the Charter right of free speech.
By Dalwhinnie
http://westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=3007
More investigation needed before commenting.
By Dalwhinnie
There are two articles of interest floating about the blogosphere this weekend and I want to bring them to your attention. First is the suppression of scientific evidence by the Environmental protection Agency. Second is the absolute swindle encompassed by cap and trade. The two are part of a vast conspiracy to loot the poor (everyone below a billion dollars of personal wealth) for the benefit of a few of the really rich. I wanted to say “left-wing” conspiracy but I am not sure that looting the treasury and social wealth on such a scale can be left wing or right wing; it transcends such ideas.
First: create the hysteria for which your legislation is the solution. Carbon dioxide, the natural process of all combustion, is named as a pollutant, despite its fundamental role as the life-giver to lamnts.
Second: create a market which appears to reduce CO2 emissions while actually filling the pockets of the very very rich with the revenues from carbon-dixide licences (caps) which are “traded”. How do you do this? Reduce the amnunt of caps by law.
First: bad science
You will have read about this elsewhere in an article by Declan McCullough, about the suppressed report on carbon dioxide. The report says, in its executive summary, about the science of global warming:
that, since that time, and in contrast to what the IPCC predicted:
You can read the rest of the report for yourselves. Evidence ignored. Evidence suppressed. Bad science driving out good science. Read the rest…
By Dalwhinnie
The following is an imagined future talk between a teacher and student in about 2025.
- You mean they had less than a billion addresses on the Internet?”
- They had no Internet. They only had about 85 endpoints, and they were called channels then.
- Channels?
- The information only flowed one way.
- You have to be kidding. You’re kidding me, aren’t you sir?
- No, I am not. When broadcasting technology started, there were only three or four channels of television.
- What’s television?
- A pre-computer analog distribution system which employed vast amounts of spectrum to convey signals one-way. It was highly inefficient, but it was better at conveying pictures than what went before, which was only the printed word.
- How did they talk back?
- They didn’t.
- You mean they just sat there and watched stuff?
- Yes.
- Ah sir! That’s just too weird!
- Nevertheless, for a few decades after radio communication was invented, but before computers re-organized how it was done, there was a period there when signals went out but the back-channel was missing.
- It must have been a period of extreme conformity, I mean, everybody watching the same stuff must have meant they all thought alike.
- Good insight. It was. The 20th century was the century of the mass-man and the collective state, even in the parliamentary democracies. There were even people who tried to maintain that system. They called the expansion of choices ‘fragmentation of the audience’, as if we were all supposed to be watching the same thing.
- Why did they think we should all be watching the same thing?
- That’s a tough one. Your essay has to be on the social implications of “broadcasting”, and that’s an issue you should address in your paper.
By Dalwhinnie
Geert Wilders spoke in Florida recently. His speech can be found on Youtube, but in case you are in a meeting where you cannot play the video, reading this may arouse your sympathies.
GEERT WILDERS’ FREEDOM OF SPEECH SUMMIT
I wish I had come to a place they call they call sunshine state with better news but it would be very unwise to deny that the situation indeed is very gloomy, and it might take a while for you to understand the situation that we are in now. Maybe you as Americans still think that Europe is a place with a great culture and a profound way of looking at things. Maybe you see immigration as something that is inherently good for our country as it contributed so much for the United States, and I understand that. But Ladies and Gentleman the Europe as you know it from visiting Europe or from stories from your parents or friends or whoever, is on the verge of collapsing.
We are now witnessing profound changes that will forever alter Europe’s destiny and might send the Continent in what Ronald Reagan once called: “A thousand years of darkness.
And the takeover of Europe, that is currently taking place, is part of a global fight, a global fight of Islam for World domination.
Let me tell you first, that Islam is not a religion. Islam is a totalitarian political ideology. Islam hearts lies at the Koran and the Koran is a book that calls for hatred, that calls for violence, for murder, for terrorism, for war and submission.
The Koran calls upon Muslims to kill Kuffars, non-Muslims. The Koran describes Jews as monkeys and pigs, and Churchill, and I agree with him, Churchill compared the Koran, the book in the 50’s, to Adolf Hitlers book Mein Kampf.
Ladies and Gentleman the core of the problem with Islam is twofold, First, the commands of the Koran are not limited by place or time, they apply for all time, to all Muslims of the World.
By Dalwhinnie
I have this plan. I want to control the Internet. I find there is way too much free speech out there, particularly racist, sexist, right-wing hate speech. Yes, you are right. I have cracked. I have finally seen the error of my ways. I now acknowledge the importance of controlling speech from a human rights perspective, as Barbara Hall would have it. People should be accountable for what they say. How can this be done? How can Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn be countered? How can we end the seedy careers of Kathy Shaidle and her ilk?
Simple. Declare the Internet is broadcasting. No, I don’t mean broadcasting over the air. I mean “broadcasting” as in the Canadian Broadcasting Act: the propagation through a transmission medium of signals composed predominantly of full-motion video, or music.
No, please, I am not kidding. The Canadian Thought Control Commission (CTCC, formerly known as the CRTC) could spend a great deal of time estimating whether the inclusion of a video feed into a blog turns it into “broadcasting”. It could embroil the blogosphere in years of apprehension, litigation and speech “chill”. What fun! Jobs forever!
Consider the advantages:
By Glendronach
Kinsella chides Galloway for frivolous litigation over defamation of character.
Indeed.
Clearly an utter lack of shame opens up vast new frontiers of endeavour.
By Dalwhinnie
A good start for Randy Hiller. Check out his platform, which is enough to cause wets to wet themselves. A Freeedom of Association and Conscience Act? The pity is that such an act is needed.