Bill Whatcott speaks at the Shelburne Ontario Freedom rally. This rally is a monthly event and for a small town has remained amazingly resilient. I was blessed to see a few dozen folks of all ages and walks of life come to the rally to witness for freedom. I shared about my upcoming second “hate crime” trial with them and exhorted them to continue fighting for freedom.
Last week, April 1st, I attended a pro-freedom/anti-carbon tax rally in St Catharines, ON. Over the course of the day (the rally went from 11:00 am to 7:00 pm) over 100 people came and went.
At the St. Catharines rally I was pleased to meet this fellow who I have known for a few years through e-mail. He lives in St. Catharines, but is very supportive of Alberta’s energy industry and considers himself to be closer to Alberta in terms of values than Ontario. Note Tamara Lich’s autograph on his sign.
While Ontario’s leaders, Ford, Trudeau, Chow, Horwath, etc….. are huge disappointments, my travels since coming to Ontario to prepare for my second criminal hate speech trial is telling me there are still lots of good people in this province and indeed I am seeing a very positive backlash against wokeism, homofascism, and cancel culture. Ontarians know they have lost their freedom, they are waking up and they want a non tyrannical government that listens to them back again.
Federally-funded “anti-hate” group only covers hate from “extreme right,” founder says
[Cosmin Dzsurdzsa and the folks at True North may be surprised that the massively federally and BMO-funded Canadian Anti-Hate Network have had no time to denounce extremists and hateful comments from the left over the Israel-Hamas war because they were focused on the “extreme right”. We at CAFE are not surprised. The war on an emotion — hate — was never really about hate. It was about suppressing nationalist opinion and shielding Jews and privileged non-White minorities from serious criticism. The pernicious “hate law”, Sec. 318 & 319 of the Criminal Code were introduced by supposed civil libertarian Pierre Trudeau in 1971. In its sordid 52 year history, no Jew, no non-White, with the exception of Indian Chief David Ahenakew, was ever prosecuted for of convicted for hate. Thirty years of agitation by the Canadian Jewish Congress led to the stacked Cohen Commission on hate propaganda in 1965. This was a key year. In this year, dark forces were changing our immigration laws to eventually let in hordes from the Third World to replace Canada’s European founding/settler people That being the goal, they changed our flag from the Red Ensign which celebrated our European origins the the present rather vapid Pearson pennant. If you’re going to imposed the brazen flim flam of replacing the founding/settler people, you can anticipate some opposition. Hence, the speech suppressing hate” and similar provincial anti-free speech clones. Still, it’s refreshing to have Mr. Anti-hate Bernie Farber, a longtime operative of the former Canadian Jewish Congress admit that “anti-hate” is basically anti-White. — Paul Fromm
A federally-funded “anti-hate” organization says its relative silence on weeks of antisemitism has been because it only has the resources to focus on hate from the “extreme right.”
Canadian Anti-Hate Network (CAHN) founding chair Bernie Farber made the admission on X in response to a post criticizing the organization for its silence on the recent wave of antisemitism following a terrorist attack on Israelis.
“It’s been a month since the terrorist attack on Israelis. This is the first post from anti-hate since then. I know your views because I’ve grown up knowing you. But it’s not just me calling this out,” posted the user, Ariella Kimmel. https://www.youtube.com/embed/9zsjNrOAuBk?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1
“Ariella, antihate.ca focuses on the extreme right. That is what it does. I wish we had the resources to do more. We just don’t,” replied Farber.
The organization has faced weeks of criticism for its sparse reporting on the ongoing anti-Israel protests engulfing Canada.
Farber’s admission sparked a backlash on social media. True North’s Andrew Lawton criticized Farber’s selective focus.
“Canada’s leading anti-hate activist, Bernie Farber, says (CAHN’s) silence on a month of antisemitism has been because they only focus on the ‘extreme right.’ Thanks for admitting this is all coming from the left then, Bernie!”, posted Lawton.
True North founder Candice Malcolm also joined in the criticism pointing to the fact that anti-Israel rallies across Canada were staged by the extreme left.
“As Andrew Lawton points out, the boss over at ‘anti-hate’ let the cat out of the bag. The reason they’re not covering the anti-Israel hatefests throughout Canada is because those rallies are led by the Left (including Islamists) not the scary Right,” wrote Malcolm.
The accusations against CAHN come amid nationwide demonstrations by supporters of Hamas. Major anti-Israel demonstrations have been held in cities such as Ottawa, Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver, and Montreal following Hamas’ attack on Israel.
Despite the rise in antisemitic incidents during these protests, CAHN has not published any reports or public comments on the threats faced by Jewish communities from the far-left specifically.
The issue of antisemitism is not confined to Canada. In the United States, a 69-year-old Jewish man died following a confrontation with pro-Palestinian demonstrators in suburban Los Angeles. The Ventura County Sheriff’s Department is investigating the incident as a possible hate crime.
Holocaust Denial Now Punishable By Prison Time In Canada
It’s something that has been discussed in this country for years: the proposal of making Holocaust denial a criminal offence.
It was buried in Bill C-19, Division 21, Section 332. This wasn’t a stand alone Bill, but rather, slipped into a budget. Most likely, very few people know about it.
332 (1) Section 319 of the Criminal Code is amended by adding the following after subsection (2): Willful promotion of antisemitism (2.1) Everyone who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, willfully promotes antisemitism by condoning, denying or downplaying the Holocaust (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
(2) Subsections 319(4) to (6) of the Act are replaced by the following: Defences — subsection (2.1) (3.1) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2.1) (a) if they establish that the statements communicated were true; (b) if, in good faith, they expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text; (c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds they believed them to be true; or (d) if, in good faith, they intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of antisemitism toward Jews.
Forfeiture (4) If a person is convicted of an offence under subsection (1), (2) or (2.1) or section 318, anything by means of or in relation to which the offence was committed, on such conviction, may, in addition to any other punishment imposed, be ordered by the presiding provincial court judge or judge to be forfeited to Her Majesty in right of the province in which that person is convicted, for disposal as the Attorney General may direct.
Exemption from seizure of communication facilities (5) Subsections 199(6) and (7) apply, with any modifications that the circumstances require, to subsection (1), (2) or (2.1) or section 318.
Consent (6) No proceeding for an offence under subsection (2) or (2.1) shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General.
(3) Subsection 319(7) of the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order: Holocaust means the planned and deliberate state-sponsored persecution and annihilation of European Jewry by the Nazis and their collaborators from 1933 to 1945; (Holocauste)
Would “Conservatives” oppose this on free speech grounds? Would they fight for the principle that even controversial speech must be protected? Will they object to it being slipped into a budget? Not exactly.
Kevin Waugh, a “Conservative”, introduced Bill C-250, a Private Member’s Bill, that would do basically the same thing. Interestingly, Waugh’s lacked some safeguards that Bill C-19 had, such as remedies to prevent prosecution.
It’s unclear why this was introduced twice in the House of Commons. Perhaps Waugh’s Private Bill was a backup plan in case Schedule 21 got removed from the budget.
Both versions have the provision that consent from the Attorney General is required for a prosecution. While this may be seen as a check, it opens the possibility of politically selected cases.
Where’s Pierre Poilievre on this free speech issue? Where’s Maxime Bernier?
Remember the flack Iqra Khalid caught for M-103? That was a Motion simply to “study” Islamophobia, and she has heckled for a long time afterwards. She never proposed putting anyone in prison.
For what it’s worth, Senator Paula Simons was willing to speak out on this. However, she’s very much in the minority when it comes to addressing the subject.
Remembering A Free Speech Martyr & Christian Author, Malcolm Ross
A friend gave me his treasure trove of tapes and book and pamphlets among which are many recordings of CAFE meetings
I listen to a tape in short segments. I am most of the way through the talk given by Malcolm Ross June 25th 1998 “My 10 Year Battle for Vindication.” I’m pretty sure I bought Ross’ book from you at some point. [The book is Cross-Examination: Christianity on Trial –– BY Malcolm Ross fired for his religious writings on abortion and other issues appealed to Canada’s Supreme Court in 1990. This rare book is available for $25.00 plus $10 postage from C-FAR Books, P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, CANADA.]
I will be turning the tape-recording in to a transcript. His explanation of the implications of the ruling of the Supremes is shocking a quarter of a century later — astonishing not a scintilla of genuine “evidence” that any real person felt they were in a “poisoned environment” in his classroom. Yet, the Supremes figured out that it was only reasonable to draw the inference of such !!
This, I fear, is what’s going to happen to Bill Whatcott, if he goes through the meatgrinder again. The Bible itself becomes ‘hate literature’ if published anywhere outside some little ‘safe space’ of a building properly registered with the gov’t as a ‘charity’ for purposes of income tax receipts
Ross cites a book to do with the doctrines of modern Juda-ism in which the “Holocaust” is understood to be an essential part of that religion.
There isn’t one person in a million who grasps that. I sure didn’t
What that means for Canada, is, after the recent amendment to section 319 of the Criminal Code, a person can be prosecuted for ‘blasphemy’ against the state-sanctioned religion, if some one of the Jud-aic persuasion, feels his or her dignity has been impugned by his questioning the Hollywood version of World War II.
[For more than 30 years, Jewish groups lobbied and arm-twisted to induce Canada under Pierre Elliott Trudeau to introduce a speech control law to shield them (and some other privileged minority groups) from sharp criticism. This is Canada’s notorious “hate law”Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code. A Quebec man Gabriel Sohier Chaput is the latest victim of minority thought control. Yet, his lawyer Helene Poussard argued for his acquittal on the grounds that he Crown had failed to prove a link between Nazi ideology and the deaths of many Jews in WWII. Jewish groups are apoplectic that any shred of doubt can be shone on the Globalist elite’s new religion of holocaust. — Paul Fromm]
The hate-speech trial of Gabriel Sohier Chaput concluded in Montreal with his lawyer raising doubts about Nazism and the Holocaust
November 28, 2022
By Janice Arnold
Gabriel Sohier Chaput (Credit: B’nai Brith Canada)
The lawyer defending an alleged promoter of hatred against Jews told the judge hearing his case that the fact that the Holocaust was the consequence of Nazism cannot be entered as evidence without proof.
Hélène Poussard argued that her client, Gabriel Sohier Chaput, who faces one count of wilful incitement of hatred against an identifiable group, cannot be found guilty because the prosecution did not provide sufficient proof of a direct link between Nazi ideology and the eventual murder of millions of Jews.
At the final day of Chaput’s trial on Nov. 25, Poussard said the very definition of Nazism remains vague and the use of the term today may be different from what it was in the 1930s and ‘40s.
The extermination of Jews was not part of the Nazi regime’s original plans she asserted but was adopted for “economic” reasons later on.
She further argued that not all Nazi party members were in favour of the extermination of the Jewish people and, conversely, many German soldiers who were not Nazis killed hundreds of thousands of Jews because they were ordered to do so.
She noted that the Nazi regime considered other ethnic groups as inferior to Germans, implying that Jews were not unique.
Poussard raised doubts about the exact number of Jews annihilated, citing a historian named Jack R. Fischer who she said estimated it at from 4.2 million to 7 million.
She was countering the final argument of Crown prosecutor Patrick Lafrenière who maintained that Quebec Court judge Manlio Del Negro should take the genocide of 6 million Jews by the Nazis as a matter of judicial notice, that is, a fact so well established that it is unnecessary to prove it before a court.
Lafrenière suggested the judge could readily verify that from such reliable sources as the Encyclopedia Britannica.
The arguments by both parties at this final single day continued in a similar vein as they had when the trial broke off in July, after having opened in March, years after Chaput was charged.
The case against the 36-year-old Montreal man is based on a single article he posted on The Daily Stormer, a far-right U.S.-based online publication, in January 2017 headed “Nazis Trigger Jews by Putting Up Posters on Ch—k Church,” using a derogatory term for Asians and referring to an incident in British Columbia.
The piece called for “a year of action” in which “no SJW (social justice warrior) or Jew can remain safely untriggered.” Chaput urged “non-stop Nazism everywhere until the streets are flooded with the tears of our enemies.”
It was accompanied by a drawing of a guard about to activate a gas chamber and other Nazi imagery.
Chaput, who testified he contributed between 800 and 1,000 articles to The Daily Stormer under the pseudonym Zeiger, said that the article in question was satire meant to mock the political correctness of the left.
While acknowledging the article was in “bad taste” and that The Daily Stormer is “scornful and vexatious” in its representation of minorities and women, his lawyer contended Chaput was within the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the article would not lead “any reasonable person” to hate Jews.
Lafrenière countered that there can be no doubt Chaput’s words could be interpreted as hateful and even violent, specifically against Jews, and that The Daily Stormer is “clearly hate propaganda.”
In any event, a satirical intention does not absolve one from a hate speech conviction, he said.
In July, Justice Del Negro halted Poussard after she “went too far” in some of her suggestions on why the Holocaust took place, while reproaching Lafrenière for not bringing in an expert witness to back up his assertion that Nazism led directly to the persecution and murder of Jews.
This time, when Justice Del Negro questioned Poussard on whether she was contesting the extent of the Holocaust, she denied doing so.
Justice Del Negro said he would deliver his verdict on Jan. 23. If convicted, Chaput faces a maximum sentence of two years in prison.
The turn this trial has taken to becoming a debate over the link between Nazism and the Holocaust has alarmed the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) and B’nai Brith Canada, which in 2018 filed the complaint against Chaput which led to his eventual arrest.
Earlier that year, the Montreal Gazette ran a series of investigative articles, largely based on information from local anti-fascist groups, that identified Chaput as Zeiger and that he was influential in the neo-Nazi movement.
At the trial’s conclusion, Emmanuelle Amar, CIJA’s Quebec director of policy and research, said Canadian jurisprudence recognizes the Holocaust as a historical and uncontestable fact. Moreover, since June it has been a criminal offence to deny or minimize the Holocaust.
“The Holocaust is the most minutely documented genocide in the world. It is documented by its perpetrators, by their victims, by bystanders.”
CIJA said this trial points to the need for mandatory education on the Holocaust and antisemitism in Quebec schools.
Just ahead of the trial’s final day, CIJA’s Quebec vice-president Eta Yudin issued a statement: “The Nazi regime’s genocidal intent was clear, and courts have long accepted the lived experiences of millions of our people as proof of this historical fact… Poussard should be careful not to go down the same path as her client.
“Poussard should have known she was out of bounds when she presented her denialist line of argument… We hope the trial can resume after this frivolous interlude so that her client, Sohier Chaput, can be judged for the hate he spewed online and the impact it has had on Jewish people in Quebec, Canada, and around the world.”
B’nai Brith has called on federal Justice Minister David Lametti and his provincial counterparts to ensure Canadian judges have a thorough understanding of the Holocaust.
“Every Canadian should be appalled,” said Sam Goldstein, B’nai Brith’s director of legal services, referring to Justice Del Negro’s handling of the hearing in July. “We don’t expect Holocaust denial and distortion from our courts. The prosecutor does not need to establish that the Holocaust happened. No expert witness is needed. The Jewish community is outraged.”
In June 2016 Bill Whatcott and a half dozen other Christian activists entered the Toronto Homosexual Pride Parade under the guise of being members of The Gay Zombie Cannabis Consumers. During the parade, they handed out about 3,000 small packages made to look like condoms that contained Gospel flyers warning homosexuals of the physical and spiritual dangers related to homosexual sexual practices and sharing the good news that Jesus Christ died for all of humanity, including those who have embraced the homosexual lifestyle.
Bill knew that homosexual activists would be unhappy with his Gospel-centered, church- militant infiltration of their tax funded parade – a parade full of hate speech towards Christians and where open displays of sexual perversion and nudity is rampant. However, Bill never dreamed the homosexual activists would go as far as they have in trying to destroy him, his friends, and his supporters, in an attempt to silence his voice.
In 2016, following the parade, homosexual activists George Smitherman, Christopher Hudspeth and Doug Elliott announced a $104 million dollar class action lawsuit on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, in a bid to financially ruin Bill Whatcott and anyone who helped him in any way to bring the Gospel to the Toronto Homosexual Pride parade. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, former Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne and the Liberal party of Canada were among the “victims” named in the law suit. After two years of litigation and discovery, the homosexual activists realized that Bill Whatcott did not own anything, that no one with substantial money was supporting him, and that he was never going to reveal the names of his friends, even if he was put in jail for contempt. So, Elliott, Hudspeth, and Smitherman eventually dropped their lawsuit in 2018.
Bill thought that was the end of the retaliation by the LGBT activists for his bringing the Gospel to their parade in 2016. Two years passed by and everyone thought that was the end of the matter. But to Bill’s surprise, in June 2016, one of the last acts of the Ontario Liberal government was to have the Attorney General authorize the laying of the charge of public incitement of hate, contrary to s. 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada, against Bill. It was alleged that Bill’s Gospel flyer that was distributed at the 2016 Toronto Pride Parade by the “Gay Zombie Cannabis Consumers” was hateful against gays.
A Canada-wide warrant for his arrest was issued. When Bill heard about the warrant he voluntarily surrendered to police in Calgary and was brought to Toronto to stand trial for this so-called “hate crime.” Although released on bail once he got to Toronto, one of the release terms subjected Bill’s Gospel flyer to a publication ban in Canada.
Bill’s case proceeded through the criminal justice system for 3 years. After a number of pre-trial motions, the case was heard in the Superior Court for Ontario in October 2021. Although the case proceeded virtually because of government imposed COVID restrictions, it was well attended by those interested in the issues. On December 10, 2021 the trial judge released his judgment finding Bill not guilty and entering a verdict of acquittal. [Search: R. v. Whatcott 2021 ONSC 8077 at Superior Court of Justice Judgments (ontariocourts.ca)].
One would think that, with the end of the trial, the homosexual activists would move on and not continue to lobby the government. Even though Bill was found not guilty, those who pressed for the charge and his conviction were not satisfied with the fact that, he did not escape unscathed.
Bill lost his job as a bus driver when the Canada Wide Arrest Warrant was issued and was reported in the media. Between the date he surrendered in Calgary until he could appear in Toronto to get bail, Bill spent almost a week in jail. Unfortunately, that has not been the case. The previous cases left Bill with virtually no money to defend himself on the charge, so he was required to apply to Legal Aid Ontario for assistance. Although there was resistance to his application, Bill eventually received assistance but now owes a large debt to Legal Aid Ontario.
Recently, Bill was served with a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario, filed by the Attorney General of Ontario, to which he must respond to protect his name, his reputation and his freedom. The problem is that this entire ordeal has placed an enormous burden on Bill, emotionally, physically and of course financially.
BILL NEEDS HELP!
Bill’s lawyers estimate the cost of responding to the appeal would normally be about $100,000. They are prepared to work at the Legal Aid rate, but even then, the cost will be about $50,000. Bill simply is not able to pay that amount.
If God would put it on your heart to help out in defending this important legal victory in the Ontario Court of Appeal, we would be grateful.
Galatians 6:2: “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.”
IN CHRIST. GOD BLESS.
———————————————————- 10/4/21
Well-known pro-family activist Bill Whatcott’s trial began today at the Superior Court of Justice in Toronto for an alleged “hate crime” he committed in which he distributed pamphlets at the 2016 Toronto Pride Parade warning people of the physical and spiritual dangers of homosexual activity.
“I’m [being prosecuted] under the ‘Willful Promotion of Hatred,’” Whatcott told LifeSite on Friday.
“The law itself is terrible, I think it is ambiguous,” he added.
According to Whatcott, the Crown prosecutor alleges that his distribution of the flyers constitutes the “wilful promotion of hatred” against homosexuals per the Criminal Code of Canada, and in turn is seeking a prison term of 18 months if Whatcott is found guilty.
Whatcott, who has pleaded not guilty, told LifeSite that he rejected a plea deal for “three years house arrest” because he feels as though he has a “moral obligation” to fight the charge entirely.
“I couldn’t plead [guilty], it is so blatantly absurd, I owe it to this country to not plead [guilty],” he said.
The incident in question took place in 2016 when Whatcott and several others marched in the Toronto Pride Parade dressed in skin-tight green bodysuits with face masks as members of the “Gay Zombies Cannabis Consumers Association.”
As previously reported by LifeSite, the group distributed 3,000 pamphlets that included flyers warning of the spiritual and physical harms of homosexual activity.
The flyers, which are currently under a publication ban from the court, contained graphic images of sexually transmitted diseases, as well as Bible verses and statistics regarding homosexual behavior.
The flyers also displayed a picture of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and former Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne, calling for their repentance regarding their “homosexual activism.”
Bill only needs $500 to cover his long drive back to Alberta, so let’s support this brave man as he stands up for the truth in court.
A Powerful Open Letter to Pierre Poilievre on Free Speech — Hope He Takes it to Heart
Dear Pierre,
I hope you are keeping well. The rights of Canadians to freely hold and express beliefs are being eroded at an alarming speed under the Trudeau government. Some of its recent decisions even require that Canadians renounce their most deeply held moral convictions and express opinions they disagree with.
In 2018, the Liberal government denied summer job funding to organizations, including charities, that would not sign an attestation supporting abortion. It also passed bill C-16 as part of a trend to force Canadians to express support for the existence of various gender identities beyond the biological categories of male and female, and to use pronouns demanded by those who identify with these other genders.
In addition to these assaults on conscience, the government launched a series of regulatory attacks on free speech on the internet and is pressuring social media companies, which are already censoring speech that isn’t politically correct, to crack down even more. It is also considering bringing back Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. This hate speech provision was repealed by the Conservative government in 2013 because it was being used arbitrarily to censor statements that offended some people on the internet.
In what appears to be a first step towards restricting our right to criticize some religions, it adopted M-103, a motion that condemns religious discrimination but only specifically mentions one religion, Islam, and without defining the term “islamophobia.”
Finally, on university campuses, a growing number of faculty and administrators—those who should be fighting for open debate of controversial ideas—have become aggressive advocates for censorship.
History and social scientific research show that freedom of conscience and freedom of expression, when maximally protected, advance the intellectual life of a nation, foster greater ideological diversity and societal understanding, and nurture other freedoms necessary for a successful democracy.
This is why Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees citizens freedom of conscience and religion, as well as freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.
What some people find politically incorrect, offensive or even hateful cannot serve as the legal basis for discrimination and censorship. Canadians should be able to enjoy maximum freedom of conscience and expression as guaranteed in Section 2 of the Charter.
As the presumed front runner in the 2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election, as well as an individual who claims to support individual liberty and personal freedom, I believe that you should commit to publicly supporting the following policies:
Restrict the definition of hate speech in the Criminal Code to expression which explicitly advocates the use of force against identifiable groups or persons based on protected criteria such as religion, race, ethnicity, sex, or sexual orientation.
Repeal any existing legislation or regulation curtailing free speech on the internet and prevent the reinstatement of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Repeal C-16, M-103, C-10, and C-36. Ensure that Canadians can exercise their freedom of conscience to its fullest extent as it is intended under the Charter and are not discriminated against because of their moral convictions.
Repeal Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada.
Withhold federal funding from any post-secondary institution shown to be violating the freedom of expression of its students or faculty.
Political Prisoner Dr. James Sears Begins His Third Week in Jail, Pending Appeal
TORONTO. June 27, 2021. Political prisoner Dr. James Sears sentenced to the maximum, a year in prison, for violating Canada’s notorious “hate law”, Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code remains on hold in the South Toronto Detention Centre.
His appeal of his 2019 conviction was denied in a June 14 ruling. The editor of the satirical tabloid YOUR WAR NEWS immediately sought leave from the Ontario Court of Appeals and bail, pending the appeal. He was finally able to get word to his supporters today. A combination of COVID fearfulness and the sclerotic nature of Ontario’s justice system at the best of times has kept the brilliant writer and medical doctor behind prison bars.
A judge will render his decision by Zoom. The judge must read over the materials filed and decide whether there is any merit to his application for leave. If he decides there is, Dr. Sears will be released on bail.
He is in good spirits and is hopeful.
In January, 2019, Judge Richard Blouin found Dr. Sears and his co-accused Leroy St. Germaine of “wilfully promoting” hatred against privileged groups, namely, Jews and women in his satire.
Amnesty International considers a person a “prisoner of conscience” or political prisoner if they are punished or jailed solely for the non-violent expression of their political, religious or cultural views.
Crown Too Scared of COVID to Appear in Court, Crown Insists Sears’ “Hate Law” Appeal Be Held By Zoom
Political prisoner Dr. James Sears, editor of the satirical broadsheet YOUR WARD NEWS was convicted on two counts of “hate” (against Jews and women), under Canada’s notorious “hate law” (Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code). In January 2019, he was sentenced to the maximum — a year in prison. The maximum sentence under this thought control law had never before been imposed. YOUR WARD NEWS publisher Leroy St. Germaine also received a year but, due to his Aboriginal status was given house arrest.
An appeal was immediately launched. Originally, the appeal was to have been heard of March 23, 2020. The COVID hysteria intervened and the appeal was rescheduled to October 13-15.
Now, Dr. Sears and Mr. St. Germaine are to be robbed of an appearance in persons in court. Dr. Sears explains: “Crown Attorney Michael Bernstein, who is representing the Crown on my appeal of my hate speech charges, at the last minute today, went in front of a judge and stated that my mere presence in court from October 13th to 15th put him, as a person over the age of 65, at risk of death from COVID. He presented the judge with an anti-mask flyers he claims I distributed as proof that I am basically full of germs and a risk to everyone in the courtroom because I refuse to wear a mask. The judge agreed and now the hearing, for Mr. Bernstein’s safety, will take place by zoom. “
Watch for Fireworks at YOUR WARD NEWS “Hate Law” Sentencing Hearing
Watch for fireworks at College Park Court, Monday, July 10. Does Canada’s Cultural Marxist dominated judiciary have the stones to send YOUR WARD NEWS editor to jail for his satirical newspaper? Just last week Foreign Affairs Minister Krystia Freeland scolded nations like Turkey and Pakistan and the Philippines for suppressing a free press. She even pledged $1-million to a fund to protect journalists. Hope she’ll contribute to the YOUR WARD NEWS DEFENCE FUND,
days to go
