They finally got him off
Ahenakew found not guilty. A Canadian Indian can utter the most vile antisemitic rants to a reporter but that is OK. It is not what you say but what group you belong to in Canada. Forget any idea of equal justice for all. There is plenty of bigotry in Canada: official bigotry in favor of selected minorities.
"Just minutes earlier, a Saskatchewan judge had found Mr. Ahenakew not guilty of willfully promoting hatred, even as he scolded him for "revolting" comments. In court Monday, Mr. Ahenakew, 75, looked like a man at prayer. Freshly buzz-cut, he crossed his arms and closed his eyes as the judge read a 19-page decision. He didn't flinch when the judge used "disgusting" and "inhumane" to describe the former native leader's comments on December 13, 2002.
On that day, Mr. Ahenakew capped off a keynote speech to a native health conference with an incoherent stream of slurs against "goddamn immigrants." During the public speech, he alleged that Jews started the Second World War. Afterwards, a Saskatoon Star-Phoenix reporter pressed Mr. Ahenakew about the remarks, asking how he could say the Holocaust was justified. "How do you get rid of a disease like that, that's going to take over, that's going to dominate?" Mr. Ahenakew responded. He went on to say the world would "be owned by the Jews right now" if Hitler had not "cleaned up a hell of a lot of things."
A 2005 trial found him guilty of willfully promoting hatred and levied a $1,000 fine. The decision was overturned 11 months later and a new trial ordered. During the retrial last fall, Mr. Ahenakew insisted he did not "hate Jews but I hate what they do."
While the judge Monday called Mr. Ahenakew's initial comments "revolting, disgusting and untrue," he did not find that the former chief ever intended to espouse those views publicly. [Giving a speech at a conference and answering questions from a reporter is not "public"? What a crock!]
Source
All we see here is totally dishonest judicial reasoning leading to a foreordained conclusion.
5 comments:
The most frightening thing here is not the actual overturning of the verdict. If you go to the source and read the comments from some of the supporters of the decision, it will make your skin crawl. Truly a great example of how hate speech is anything a liberal disagrees with.
First, let me say I disagree with everything the man says and feel his ignorance is ridiculous. That said, I feel that hate speech should still be protected. You can't have free speech without that kind of lunacy falling under its protection. Since Canada doesn't have free speech protections, the law should apply equally to all. Nobody gets a free pass simply because of what group they come from.
You either have free speech for all, or for none. If free speech only pertains to what you agree with, that makes you a liberal Democrat. (ie: a hypocrite)
What the heck,
Mark Steyn got off for making nasty remarks about Moooolums thanks to the fair Canadian judicial system.
So why not a anti-semitic red-skin?
This is Canada, their free speech laws are different from ours. If a Canadian jew started talking crap about those Indians, he would have faced hate speech charges himself.
Post a Comment