{"id":305,"date":"2013-05-20T03:11:34","date_gmt":"2013-05-20T07:11:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=305"},"modified":"2013-05-20T03:11:34","modified_gmt":"2013-05-20T07:11:34","slug":"arthur-topham-explains-the-origins-of-sec-13-now-internet-censorship-of-the-canadian-human-rights-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=305","title":{"rendered":"Arthur Topham Explains the Origins of Sec. 13 (Now Internet Censorship) of the Canadian Human Rights Act"},"content":{"rendered":"<div><span style=\"color: #ff0000; font-size: xx-large;\">Arthur Topham Explains the Origins of Sec. 13 (Now Internet Censorship) of the Canadian Human Rights Act<\/span><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div><strong><span style=\"color: #000000; font-size: large;\">Political dissident and free speech warrior Arthur Topham, relying on research done by lawyer Barbara Kulazska and Marc Lemire provides a tidy summary of the repressive Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which Marc Lemire is fighting to have ruled unconstitutional before the Federal Court of Appeal. CAFE has backed Mr. Lemire&#8217;s decade-long battle against a complaint by Richard Warman and is intervening on his behalf in the Federal Court fo Appeal.<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div><strong><span style=\"color: #3366ff; font-size: large;\">Paul Fromm<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div><strong><span style=\"color: #3366ff; font-size: large;\">Director<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div><strong><span style=\"color: #3366ff; font-size: large;\">CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div>Here\u00a0\u00a0 in Canada, in the mid-1970s, the Jewish lobby began in earnest their\u00a0\u00a0 surreptitious efforts to silence Canadians by working through Ontario\u2019s then\u00a0\u00a0 Deputy Attorney General, F.W. Callaghan. Callaghan, obviously pressured by\u00a0\u00a0 Jewish groups who wanted to silence one of their critics, John Ross Taylor,\u00a0\u00a0 began lobbying the Federal Department of Justice demanding the inclusion of\u00a0\u00a0 speech-restricting legislation that removed the need for \u201cwillfulness\u201d or fair\u00a0\u00a0 comment based on public interest. ( See the following site for the full\u00a0\u00a0 history of Section 13:\u00a0<a title=\"http:\/\/www.stopsection13.com\/history_of_sec13.html\" href=\"http:\/\/www.stopsection13.com\/history_of_sec13.html\" target=\"_blank\">http:\/\/www.stopsection13.<wbr \/>com\/history_of_sec13.html\u00a0<\/a>)<\/p>\n<div><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" alt=\"Photo: Arthur Topham Explains the Origins of Sec. 13 (Now Internet Censorship) of the Canadian Human Rights Act\n\nPolitical dissident and free speech warrior Arthur Topham, relying on research done by lawyer Barbara Kulazska and Marc Lemire provides a tidy summary of the repressive Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which Marc Lemire is fighting to have ruled unconstitutional before the Federal Court of Appeal. CAFE has backed Mr. Lemire's decade-long battle against a complaint by Richard Warman and is intervening on his behalf in the Federal Court fo Appeal.\n\nPaul Fromm\n\nDirector\n\nCANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION\n\nHere in Canada, in the mid-1970s, the Jewish lobby began in earnest their surreptitious efforts to silence Canadians by working through Ontario\u2019s then Deputy Attorney General, F.W. Callaghan. Callaghan, obviously pressured by Jewish groups who wanted to silence one of their critics, John Ross Taylor, began lobbying the Federal Department of Justice demanding the inclusion of speech-restricting legislation that removed the need for \u201cwillfulness\u201d or fair comment based on public interest. ( See the following site for the full history of Section 13: http:\/\/www.stopsection13.com\/history_of_sec13.html )\n\nAccording to Marc Lemire\u2019s history of Section 13, \u201cIn 1976, the Federal Government was looking at a larger Act for employment issues and the provision of federally regulated services.\u201d  This Act eventually would end up with the innocuous sounding name: the Canadian Human Rights Act. Although no other section of the Human Rights Act covered speech, it was not a problem for the Federal government to capitulate [to the Jewish lobby. Ed.] and slip in an extra section to satisfy Ontario\u2019s Attorney General\u2019s lust to silence John Ross Taylor and his home-based answering machine.\u201d\n\nIn 1977 Bill C-25 or the \u201cCanadian Human Rights Act\u201d was passed by the House of Commons on July 14th. Contained within it under the sub-title of \u201cHate messages\u201d was Section 13 which read:\n\n13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.\n\nAs Lemire goes on to state:\n\n\u201cOnly a few years after the law was enacted, Mr. Callaghan finally got his wish and John Ross Taylor became its first victim, with the Canadian Human Rights Commission itself and several professional Jewish groups [Canadian Holocaust Remembrance Association and the Toronto Zionist Council. Ed.] as the complainants.\n\nSince the law was first enacted, two major changes were made to Section 13.  These changes fundamentally shifted the original intent of the legislation, and turned Section 13 into an instrument to financially and morally punish those with politically incorrect views.\n\nThe first change to the legislation occurred on May 15, 1998, when Royal Accent was given to Bill S-5 (1998), which added a new penalty provision to the Canadian Human Rights Act. Bill S-5 added Section 54 to the Canadian Human Rights Act, and allows the Human Rights Tribunal to impose a financial penalty of up to $10,000.  On top of the fines, Section 54 also gave the fanatical Tribunal the ability to impose penalties of up to $20,000 as so-called \u2018special compensation.\u2019\n\nAccording to the background section of Bill S-5, these penalties were added \u201cas a response to the rising incidence of hate crimes around the world. The government believes that stronger measures are needed to deter individuals and organizations from establishing hate lines. It hopes to accomplish this by allowing victims of such lines to apply for compensation and subjecting offenders to financial penalty.\u201d\n\nThe second change occurred in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001.  Sadly, this legislation equated non-violent politically incorrect words \u2013 which are covered by Section 13 \u2013 with terrorism and concerns of national security. Under the guise of Bill C-36 \u2013 Canada\u2019s Anti-Terrorism Act, Section 13 was expanded to cover \u201ca group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet.\u201d This change, gave the power to Canadian Human Rights Commission to censor the internet and harass Canadians with views that the Rights Fanatics disagree with. [Emphasis added. Ed.]\n\nThis change was made according to Preamble of Bill C-36 to allegedly \u2018combat terrorism.\u2019\u201d\" src=\"https:\/\/fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net\/hphotos-ak-prn1\/p480x480\/603750_180615912104657_1059707859_n.jpg\" width=\"143\" height=\"150\" \/><\/div>\n<div>\n<form action=\"http:\/\/ajax\/ufi\/modify.php\" method=\"post\" target=\"_blank\"><input type=\"hidden\" name=\"charset_test\" value=\"\u20ac,\u00b4,\u20ac,\u00b4,\u6c34,\u0414,\u0404\" \/><input type=\"hidden\" name=\"fb_dtsg\" value=\"AQBH6sPT\" \/><input type=\"hidden\" name=\"feedback_params\" value=\"{&quot;actor&quot;:&quot;100004687473766&quot;,&quot;target_fbid&quot;:&quot;180615912104657&quot;,&quot;target_profile_id&quot;:&quot;100004687473766&quot;,&quot;type_id&quot;:&quot;7&quot;,&quot;assoc_obj_id&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;source_app_id&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;extra_story_params&quot;:[],&quot;content_timestamp&quot;:&quot;1369033476&quot;,&quot;check_hash&quot;:&quot;AQDtAWzZmanNhzyv&quot;,&quot;source&quot;:&quot;13&quot;}\" \/><input type=\"hidden\" name=\"data_only_response\" value=\"1\" \/><input type=\"hidden\" name=\"timeline_ufi\" value=\"1\" \/><input type=\"hidden\" name=\"timeline_log_data\" value=\"AQCsDge4L8xefz1nK2J87Yw20-9xUqIHG6eBH_vIkQgs2eZCh_B1zFr5xXdcW4D4Hb4W4Aj-fC_0j24RwXk3CKlRUY_0C7F5SJZdhDmSg6i8PYh4L4feluat_GoXhhBETY-Rvtp3Y2_Ju4qNa_q3oIo09nXk-5PN6I98U1WqNCYUKMbDfuHb8Mmr3awoHwMwz2kZzbo3huvavCHyx6v0V_wpvNuat_3BfvdRqHDAI_jHooSa9wTnMPNFgaNUhu5cWZhyh4pmbK2-8IXqJVuTleUT_99vPU754sSQu6ab3PP_hRhLYRgfQXYBmW3t9eQ_sdUuBaG0V0Ue_BV7nNiXuPd8Oe7opGPxd6cX6uOGumP4XXY3_VaGg23JKdG6Ko9KXV0D4VgcPKWUEpqwdv4buPvn\" \/><\/p>\n<div><\/div>\n<\/form>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>According\u00a0\u00a0 to Marc Lemire\u2019s history of Section 13, \u201cIn 1976, the Federal Government was\u00a0\u00a0 looking at a larger Act for employment issues and the provision of federally\u00a0\u00a0 regulated services.\u201d\u00a0 This Act eventually would end up with the innocuous\u00a0\u00a0 sounding name: the\u00a0<i>Canadian Human Rights Act<\/i>. Although no other\u00a0\u00a0 section of the Human Rights Act covered speech, it was not a problem for the\u00a0\u00a0 Federal government to capitulate [<i>to the Jewish lobby. Ed.<\/i>] and slip in\u00a0\u00a0 an extra section to satisfy Ontario\u2019s Attorney General\u2019s lust to silence John\u00a0\u00a0 Ross Taylor and his home-based answering machine.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In\u00a0\u00a0 1977 Bill C-25 or the \u201cCanadian Human Rights Act\u201d was passed by the House of\u00a0\u00a0 Commons on July 14th. Contained within it under the sub-title of \u201cHate\u00a0\u00a0 messages\u201d was Section 13 which read:<\/p>\n<p>13.\u00a0\u00a0 (1)\u00a0<i>It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons\u00a0\u00a0 acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so\u00a0\u00a0 communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a\u00a0\u00a0 telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament,\u00a0\u00a0 any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt\u00a0\u00a0 by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on\u00a0\u00a0 the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.<\/i><\/p>\n<p>As\u00a0\u00a0 Lemire goes on to state:<\/p>\n<p>\u201cOnly\u00a0\u00a0 a few years after the law was enacted, Mr. Callaghan finally got his wish and\u00a0\u00a0 John Ross Taylor became its first victim, with the Canadian Human Rights\u00a0\u00a0 Commission itself and several professional Jewish groups [<i>Canadian\u00a0\u00a0 Holocaust Remembrance Association and the Toronto Zionist Council. Ed.<\/i>] as\u00a0\u00a0 the complainants.<\/p>\n<p>Since\u00a0\u00a0 the law was first enacted, two major changes were made to Section 13.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 These changes fundamentally shifted the original intent of the legislation,\u00a0\u00a0 and turned Section 13 into an instrument to financially and morally punish\u00a0\u00a0 those with politically incorrect views.<\/p>\n<p>The\u00a0\u00a0 first change to the legislation occurred on May 15, 1998, when Royal Accent\u00a0\u00a0 was given to Bill S-5 (1998), which added a new penalty provision to\u00a0\u00a0 the\u00a0<i>Canadian Human Rights Act<\/i>. Bill S-5 added Section 54 to\u00a0\u00a0 the\u00a0<i>Canadian Human Rights Act<\/i>, and allows the Human Rights\u00a0\u00a0 Tribunal to impose a financial penalty of up to $10,000.\u00a0 On top of the\u00a0\u00a0 fines, Section 54 also gave the fanatical Tribunal the ability to impose\u00a0\u00a0 penalties of up to $20,000 as so-called \u2018special compensation.\u2019<\/p>\n<p>According\u00a0\u00a0 to the background section of Bill S-5, these penalties were added \u201c<i>as a\u00a0\u00a0 response to the rising incidence of\u00a0<\/i><b><i>hate\u00a0\u00a0 crimes<\/i><\/b><i>\u00a0around the world. The government believes that stronger\u00a0\u00a0 measures are needed to deter individuals and organizations from\u00a0\u00a0 establishing\u00a0<\/i><b><i>hate lines<\/i><\/b><i>. It hopes to accomplish this\u00a0\u00a0 by allowing victims of such lines to apply for compensation and subjecting\u00a0\u00a0 offenders to financial penalty<\/i>.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The\u00a0\u00a0 second change occurred in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September\u00a0\u00a0 11th 2001.\u00a0 Sadly, this legislation equated non-violent politically\u00a0\u00a0 incorrect words \u2013 which are covered by Section 13 \u2013 with terrorism and\u00a0\u00a0 concerns of national security. Under the guise of Bill C-36 \u2013\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Canada\u2019s\u00a0<i>Anti-Terrorism Act<\/i>, Section 13 was expanded to cover\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201c<b><i>a group of interconnected or related computers, including the\u00a0\u00a0 Internet<\/i><\/b>.\u201d This change, gave the power to Canadian Human Rights\u00a0\u00a0 Commission to censor the internet and harass Canadians with views that the\u00a0\u00a0 Rights Fanatics disagree with. [<i>Emphasis added. Ed.<\/i>]<\/p>\n<p>This\u00a0\u00a0 change was made according to Preamble of Bill C-36 to allegedly \u2018combat\u00a0\u00a0 terrorism.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Arthur Topham Explains the Origins of Sec. 13 (Now Internet Censorship) of the Canadian Human Rights Act Political dissident and free speech warrior Arthur Topham, relying on research done by lawyer Barbara Kulazska and Marc Lemire provides a tidy summary &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=305\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[39,66,9,52],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/305"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=305"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/305\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":307,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/305\/revisions\/307"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=305"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=305"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=305"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}