Sept. 5, 2009 - The Political Cesspool - James Edwards
43:13
20090905_Hour_2
|
Time
Text
Welcome to the Political Cesspool, known worldwide as the South's foremost populous radio program.
And here to guide you through the murky waters of the Political Cesspool is your host, James Edwards.
Welcome back to the show, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, children of all ages.
I am your host, James Edwards.
It's Labor Day weekend, Saturday night, September 5th.
We're still punching the clock.
We're not taking a holiday here.
No one does the job like we do.
And what a great job Keith Alexander did that first hour.
I am so richly blessed to have the great hosting staff that I have.
Eddie the Bombardier Miller, Winston Smith, Bill Roland, and of course, Keith.
We've got it covered.
And I've said it a million times.
I've already said it once this program.
What a true, what a really true gift it is to have the experience of this working relationship that we share with each and every one of you out there in our listening audience, whether you're tuned in tonight from our local flagship station, AM1380 WLRM Radio here in Memphis, Tennessee, or on one of the affiliates of the Liberty News Radio Network.
Maybe you're tuned in on the internet or on satellite.
We're happy you're here.
We're happy to have your support and your friendship.
We care for you.
We're here to serve you.
And if there's anything more we can do to be of further service, I encourage you, I invite you to email me or one of my colleagues.
Go to our website, thepoliticalcesspool.org.
My email address is jamesedwards at thepoliticalcesspool.org.
If there's anything more we can do to be using this show to better serve your interests, that is what we are here to do.
We're all a family.
We're all in this together.
We're going to fight until God himself calls us home.
And if we are successful, we will have played a small role in the reclamation of America's destiny.
That's what the Political Cesspool Radio Program is all about.
Thank you again for tuning in tonight.
We've still got much more to cover and more encouraging news forthcoming.
Later this hour, you will hear from our good friend, a man who's been appearing with us for five years, ever since this show's been on the air.
This man has been coming on and giving us updates.
He is Paul Fromm.
He's not on yet.
He'll be coming on in a couple of more segments before we go into the 8 o'clock hour tonight Central Time.
Paul is the director for the Canadian Association for Free Expression, and we have scored a tremendous victory in Canada for free speech.
Free speech has scored a victory.
We can put one in the win column for the good guys.
And I'm not going to give away the whole story.
I'm going to let Paul do that.
This is a victory that he played a role in.
His fingerprints are all over it.
And we're going to let Paul give you the details in just a few more minutes when he joins us live.
Paul Fromm, everybody, coming up tonight in the Political Cess Pool.
He is our only guest tonight.
We've really been packing the show all throughout August.
We had just, wow, a stellar, stellar lineup of guests every week.
And sometimes we had so many guests, we really couldn't get into some of the stories and deliver some of the commentary on some of the stories that have piqued our interest that we saw in the headlines and plucked from the newspapers and put on our blog on our website and want to talk about on the show.
So tonight we're making up for lost time over the course of the last couple of weeks.
Not that the show suffered because obviously last week when you have Merlin Miller, Craig Bodaker, and Greg Johnson, you're going to have great radio, but we do like to talk about some of these issues as well.
And I saw something.
I was checking my email.
I was on the Yahoo website and I saw something and it just really jumped out at me.
Now, if I had said this, I would be tarred and feathered by the ADL and the SPLC as a white supremacist.
But Yahoo can say it, and it's okay.
I don't know why that double standard exists.
I just know that it does.
Basically, the gist of it is that liberalism doesn't work in prison.
Now, we've blogged about this.
Go read our blog at thepoliticalaccessible.org, and you can follow the link for yourself.
But liberalism never works when you take it from theory to practice.
When push comes to shove, liberalism always fails.
And it fails in prison.
There aren't too many believers in the glories of diversity in prison.
High-priced prison consultants, basically, these are men who have been behind bars, advise rich and powerful men who are sentenced to prison how to survive.
Now, this story was written because Plaxico Burris, another black football player, is going to jail for a weapons violation.
But one of the fundamental rules that these prison consultants tell us is that we must stick with our own kind, and that's a quote-unquote.
Now, Time magazine, who reported on this, this was a story on Yahoo that linked to the original content from Time Magazine.
They don't blink an eye when prison consultants tell their magazine that the first rule that they tell their clients who are about to go to jail, the first rule is stick with your own kind.
You can just imagine, though, if a high school guidance counselor had given the same advice to kids being transferred to an inner city public school.
Nevertheless, here's the story from Time magazine itself.
Time can say it.
Yahoo can reprint it.
It's okay.
Only when real conservatives like me say it do you get in trouble.
But the question was asked of this prison consultant who was being interviewed: what's the first thing you say to your clients?
And this was the answer straight out of Time Magazine.
Quote, first I want to find out what their life is like.
I want to know about their personality, whether they have any addictions.
The goal is to get someone to go in addiction-free where they don't need anything from anybody.
You don't want to put yourself in debt.
The other thing is basic personal etiquette.
Now, here's where the plot thickens.
Listen to this, my friends.
A lot of people don't know how to be respectful.
They're cocky and they walk around with a chip on their shoulder.
You have to follow the rules and you have to make sure you don't do stupid things.
Now, what stupid things could this prison consultant reporting to Time magazine have in mind?
Like what?
The follow-up question.
Quote, simple things like where you sit when you go for chow.
You need to sit with your own race, your own kind.
You really have the potential to PO African Americans by sitting at a table with them if you're white.
And at the same time, white guys will wonder why you're not sitting with them.
Basic common sense.
Listen, I mean, I don't disagree with anything that's being said there, obviously, in that article.
But again, that's not racism, though.
It's only racism when I say it.
It's not racism when a leftist publication says it.
But nevertheless, this is something that Time Magazine felt so confident in that they put it in their magazine.
Yahoo links it up.
Big story.
Liberalism doesn't work in prison.
Race realism works in prison.
You sit with your own kind or you pay the price when you're in jail.
And that's true in real life, too.
If you take it from theory to practice, it always turns out that way.
But since we're on the subject, and if I have the time, I'll give you an example of what racism is.
That isn't racism, but this is, apparently, if you ask the liberal media.
I came across a story with so-called experts discussing the mystery of higher black arrest rates.
And again, as I wrote on the blog, if you want to be a paid expert on juvenile justice, you just need to throw around terms like institutional racism and disparate impact.
And then you can basically write your own ticket.
A bunch of big shots, including judges, got together the other day to listen to several quote-unquote experts talk about the puzzling fact that black juveniles in Indiana are arrested at higher rates than white kids and how to solve this problem.
Well, it's not a problem.
According to their own data, blacks are arrested at only twice the rate of whites among Indiana juveniles.
And since the black crime rate is about eight times that of the white crime rate, it's clear that the Indiana cops and courts are taking it easy on the blacks, not the other way around.
They also claim that the black kids are likely to get stiffer sentences than white kids for the same offense.
Well, if that's true, it's because the black kids are much likelier to have prior arrests and or longer records.
And I'm sure when you sift through the data, as I have, and as it is documented on our blog, you'll find that there's no discrimination at all.
Just like when they claim that banks discriminate against blacks when they make home loans, because blacks do get turned down more often.
But when you look up the rates by credit rating, blacks are treated actually exactly the same as whites.
But you can get rich doing this stuff because nobody, except the political cesspool, will point out that it's all just a bunch of crud.
It's crud.
That's what it is.
It's absolute teetotal.
It's nonsense.
Nonsense.
They get arrested more because they commit 10 times the crimes as European Americans in Indiana.
Yet they only get arrested twice as much, not 10 times as much as they should.
But again, anyway, once they do get arrested, they need to know that liberalism doesn't work in prison.
They better sit with their own people or there's going to be some hell to pay.
We are going to take some calls here in the next segment.
I know we've got some people waiting patiently on the line.
If you want to give us a call, 1-866-986-News, we'll let you call in during the commercial break.
And then coming up at the half hour, Paul Fromm is going to be joining us live with some very, very, very good news, stuff that will really make your Labor Day a happy one.
And we're going to be talking to Paul.
We've got a lot more coming up in the third hour, too.
But I do want to open up the phones for the next segment.
And we're going to be taking a call or two.
So give us a call if you want to be on the line with me tonight, James Edwards, here in the Political Cesspool.
1-866-986 News.
We are the award-winning Political Cesspool Radio Program, and we are happy to be at your service now and always.
And we're looking forward to finding out what the next five years are going to bring.
We've got a birthday coming up next month.
A lot of stuff to look forward to as we're heading into a very good time of the year.
Summer's over, fall is coming in, holidays coming up, Christmas, and so on.
And we're going to have a good time the rest of the year with you here on the Liberty News Radio Network.
But first, we've got to take a break.
I'll be back with more right after this.
We'll be back right after these messages.
Don't let me be the sisters to the baby.
Don't let me be misunderstood.
Misunderstand me, baby.
Don't let me be misunderstood.
Don't misunderstand.
Jump in the political cesspool with James and the game.
Call us tonight at 1-866-986-6397.
And here's the host of the political cesspool, James Edwards.
I only hope you're having as much fun listening to the program tonight, ladies and gentlemen, as we are bringing it to you.
Welcome back to the show.
James Edwards here, and let's go to the phones.
Wes in Idaho has been waiting patiently.
Wes, thank you for your patience.
What can we do for you?
Yeah, talking about white athletes.
I'm going to bring up the subject of Tim Tabeau.
Right, now that was, if I'm not mistaken, I'm a basketball guy, not a football guy.
That was the quarterback for the University of Florida, right?
Right.
I've got a newspaper here, American Free Press.
They're saying it could be the best, the best college player ever.
He's quite a phenomenon in that the doctors told his mother to abort him when he was a child.
He was suffering from amoeba, or the mother was, sometime after the birth of the fourth child, Pam was contracted amoeba and was advised by her doctor that because of her frail condition, she should not plan to have any more children.
And also, he's homeschooled as well.
That doesn't surprise me.
I mean, I'm a product of homeschooling, and I tell you, Wes, you are a dangerous guy.
Reading the American Free Press and listening to the political cesspool, you are much more informed than the government wants you to be.
And the Nationalist Observer, or Nationalist Times, and the Idaho Observer, he won one Heisman Trophy and was won a second, and I guess has a fourth chance.
Yes, if Florida wins the latest championship, he very well could be the Heisman trophy winner as well.
So is this his senior year, you're saying, at the University of Florida?
I think this is his senior year.
And so a guy that actually goes to college for the right reason.
Now, this guy could have been an NFL draft pick probably two years ago, and yet he's going to stay and get his degree.
Now, how often do you see that?
That's what it looks like.
That's a great story.
Just wanted to bring that subject up.
It's quite a story.
He's an all-American guy, too.
I remember, I don't know if he was chastised, but he, I think, prayed or did something or mentioned faith in God after winning the national championship.
And of course, he got all the jeers from that.
But yeah, I mean, yeah, Tebo, like I said, I don't follow college sports to the extent that, well, you just can't follow everything, but I do know bits and pieces about this guy.
And everything I've heard has been positive.
And obviously, you're solidifying that information tonight.
So obviously a guy worthy of our support.
And thank you, Wes, for bringing it back to our attention.
All right.
Wes from Idaho, thank you so much.
If you want to be on the line with us tonight, the toll-free number is 1-866-986 News.
And since Wes got us back on the thread of sports, I've got another sports story here, and it kind of coincides with everything else we always talk about.
But I got another example of what racism is, according to the national media and the false gods of political correctness.
Booing black athletes is now racism.
Yes, indeed.
I read it in the paper, so it has to be true.
Chicago Cubs player Milton Bradley.
Now, I'm definitely not a follower of baseball.
I always thought Milton Bradley made board games, but apparently he's a baseball player.
Chicago Cubs player Milton Bradley.
Now, this guy, by what preliminary and cursory research I did, is having an absolutely woeful and terrible year, despite the fact he's being paid $10 million.
He's been complaining that Wrigley Field fans are racists, quote unquote.
That's their crutch.
That's their answer for everything.
They live in a racist society.
They live in a racist, you know, everybody's a race.
Everybody's out to get them.
As Pat Buchanan has said, and as Pat Buchanan has said on this show, we've heard the grievances.
Where's the gratitude?
He's getting paid $10 million a year.
What is he upset about?
Because they're booing him for terrible performance, for not living up to the money that the rest of us can only dream of.
It's not, the bad thing is not that he did what so many others do, blame all of their shortcomings and failures on racism.
Instead of laughing in his face, or better yet, sending him back to the minors, the Chicago Cubs, get this, ladies and gentlemen, this is how sick America has become.
How sick corporate America has become, at least.
The Chicago Cubs, clubs, the Chicago Cubs have planted security officers in the stands.
Are you hearing me, ladies and gentlemen?
In the stands at Wrigley Field to eject any fans who expresses their displeasure with Bradley.
Let's recap this because I don't, maybe you didn't.
This is one of those stories that you almost have to cover it twice because it's so outlandish, so offensive, and so outrageous.
This is a guy having a terrible year.
His stats are pathetic.
He's getting paid $10 million, though.
Did he earn it?
You'd be the judge on that.
But he's getting paid $10 million.
He gets booed, rightfully so, because he's not producing.
And he cries racism.
And again, instead of the Chicago Cubs organization laughing in his face, booting him back down to the minors, they are planting security guards in the stands to forcibly remove anyone who expresses their displeasure in this guy.
And I read now from the story that I linked to on the blog.
And again, you can read it for yourself.
And we want you to.
We want you to visit our website, thepolitical cesspool.org.
And this is the story that I linked to to give you the facts in the background, the reference on this story.
Quote, desperate to avert negative publicity, the Cubs foolishly planted goons in the bleachers for Thursday's games who were instructed to eject Bradley's hecklers.
Most fans reported no racial slurs being hurled at Bradley, but several were tossed anyway for saying Bradley stinks or some variation of it.
I've gone to a lot of professional sporting events.
I have heard a lot of profanity and lewd gestures, but never have I seen anyone be ejected.
Only when they're accused of being racist are they ejected.
So, you know, again, political correctness manifests itself in absolutely every corner of American life and American culture, and we have got to do what we can to rid ourselves of this fast-spreading cancer.
I don't care if it's in the stands of Wrigley Field or on MTV or in our churches or in our universities, in our high schools, in our jobs, wherever.
Political correctness and anti-white bigotry, anti-Americanism, anti-Christianity.
Wherever we find these things, as true Americans and as descendants of the forebears who carved this nation from a wilderness, we owe it to our ancestors to stand up and fight back against this nonsense.
The price we pay, and I have said this time and time again, the price we pay, the price we might pay, we pay the price here on this show because we're such a big show now and we've received such glaring media attention.
And you might pay the price too if you're effective in your activism.
But the price we pay with character defamations and nasty words from people who hate us anyway, that pales in comparison to the price of blood and bone that our ancestors sacrificed to give us this country, the American experiment, the greatest gift that mankind has ever bequeathed itself.
And we're going to let it slip away because we're afraid that somebody might call us the R word.
I mean, you're a racist if you believe in God.
You're a racist if you want to put America first.
You're a racist if you boo players that don't perform well.
You're a racist if you say that we shouldn't have affirmative action.
We should let merit decide who gets the appointments.
It means everything, folks.
It means nothing.
Stand up.
Fight back.
Be one of us.
We'll talk more about it right after this.
We'll be back right after these messages.
To get on the show and express your opinion in the political cesspool, call us toll-free at 1-866-986-6397.
We gotta get out of this place.
Welcome back to the show, everyone.
James Edwards here with you.
We are waiting to touch base with Paul Fromm.
I talked to Paul this morning.
He's out of town.
He is not at his home base in Canada.
He is in the far west.
And we've got a little bit maybe a miscommunication with regard to time zones.
This is live radio.
So this happens once in a blue moon.
We're going to keep trying to reach Paul.
Good guy.
He's never missed an interview.
Hopefully, he'll be able to join us here.
If not, we'll just push him back to next week because you've got to hear this news he's got.
We're just really excited about this.
This is something he got top billing on the show this week.
This was something that was so good.
And we're going to keep trying to reach Paul.
In the meantime, we've got plenty more to talk about.
I want to talk about hate crimes hoaxes.
Hate crime hoaxes.
Now, this is something, man, this is something that really you see a lot of out there.
Now, the media every now and then will slip up and have to report that it turns out to be a hoax.
For instance, the spraying of a swastika on a Jewish girl's dorm, a hoax.
That was a hoax a couple of years ago.
The whole Gina Louisiana thing was more than a hoax.
That was just a wow, a complete media orchestrated event.
Just sickening, sickening stuff down there.
Here in Memphis last week, they were clamoring about a noose that had been hung in a tree in a black neighborhood.
Turned out that, of course, some black gangsta had put the noose up there to stir up incite race riots and things of that nature.
Because they have nothing better to do.
On the flip side, the people that these things are always attributed to in the beginning are European Americans.
But of course, we don't have the time to do it.
We're too busy working to support the welfare state and then to support our own families.
We don't have time to go out and play child's games like the people who don't work have time to do.
And once again, we find that hate crime hoaxes, however, don't just happen here in America.
It's a worldwide pandemic.
Over in Europe, a hate crime hoax was recently enacted trying to, I guess you would say, frame or set up the BNP or activists of the BNP.
And it turned out to be a hoax.
And I called it about a week before It got proven to be a hoax.
The story came out.
I saw it in the news.
I said, this is a hoax.
This never happened.
And sure enough, I was proven right just a couple of days ago.
But here's the story, just to let you know what I'm talking about.
Over there in the United Kingdom in England, a Muslim claims that he was dragged out of his home and thrown into his car trunk by two white men.
Follow me here on this, ladies and gentlemen.
Muslim claims he's dragged out of his home by two white men, thrown into the trunk of a car.
They drove him to a wooded area.
They threatened him, and then they left.
That's all they did.
They did all that.
And he knows that they were members of the British National Party.
Now, how does he know that?
Well, he doesn't have proof, but who else would it be?
The BNP are racists, so it must be them, right?
Wrong.
Like it ever even happened at all.
The BNP, first of all, is not a racist party.
It is a pro-white party that stands to put the founding fathers or the descendants of the founding fathers of the British Empire, Great Britain, England, back into the rightful control of that country, just like we want to put America first.
They want to put England first.
And Nicole, by the way, I just missed a call on my cell phone from Paul Fromm, so maybe we can reach him now.
He must be by the phone.
But anyway, so this guy wanted us to believe this Muslim over there in England wanted us to believe that these guys abducted him, put him in the car, drove him out to a wooded area, threatened him, announced that they were members of the BNP, then went away.
Well, it wouldn't happen.
And in fact, this guy turned out to be a leader of a Muslim group over there, and he was arrested for phony hate crime charges against the BNP.
Folks, can I call him or what?
You got to go check that out, though.
You got to go check it out on our blog at thepolitical cesspool.org because we've got all the links there.
And it's just great stuff to see these people busted for doing stuff like this because they know that their philosophy and their name calling and libel and slander against our positions won't hold up because we're right.
What we want is what's right.
What they want is what's wrong.
And since they can't beat us fair and square, they have to try to frame us and set us up and do these things.
And every now and then they actually get caught doing it.
And that's always richly rewarding.
We got another hate crime hoax that we found in the political cesspool.
This one came out of Denver.
The other night in Denver, and I'm reading straight from our blog here.
Two people took a hammer and busted several windows at the state Democratic Party headquarters.
Cops caught one of the suspects right away, 24-year-old Maurice Schwinkler.
Local Democrats wasted no time in blaming the attack on hate being spread by right-wing conservatives because the windows held pictures of Obama and anti-Obamacare signs.
And I read directly from the story, the Rocky Mountain News.
Early Tuesday, Democratic Party chairwoman Pat Wach said the damage to her building in Denver's art district was a consequence of, quote, an effort on the other side to stir up hate.
Well, the truth is, shortly after that, the 24-year-old Maurice Schwinkler was identified as a long-time left-wing Democratic activist.
So, the Democrats changed their tune, denying that she had said what she said earlier.
She denies she ever even said it at all.
Going back to the Rocky Mountain News, she tempered her statement after Schwinkler's political history was revealed.
Quote, well, what I've been saying, and this is the Democratic spokesman again out there in Denver.
Now, what I've been saying is that there is a lot of rhetoric out there coming from both sides of the spectrum.
That's what's been disturbing to me.
People are saying a lot of things that's not appropriate for civil discourse.
Well, that's not what she said at all.
Now, it turns out, and I get this, though, it turns out, though, that the Schwinkler who busted the windows there at the Democratic Party headquarters and left these anti-Obama signs, he's not only a far-left, or it is not only a far-left liberal, he or she, depending on your persuasion, is also a transvestite pervert who dresses as a woman and calls himself Ariel Attack.
He was obviously hoping that the vandalism wouldn't, excuse me, excuse me, he was obviously hoping that the vandalism would be blamed on the racist right-wing white people who hate the thought of a black man in the White House, but he wasn't fast enough to get away from the cops.
And notice how in the first link, and this is, you'll have to go to the blog to read it, that in the first link that we have there regarding this story, the mainstream newspaper ignored, completely ignored to mention his transgendered status.
They refer to him only as Matthew with masculine pronouns and don't even mention his perversion.
That's because he's the perpetrator.
If he was claiming to be the victim, though, of the crime, the paper would be calling him Ariel, she, her, etc.
But the media treats perverts like non-whites.
If they're the victim of the crime, their status is all important.
If they're the criminal, it should be hushed up.
And once again, only the political cesspool has the courage to speak the truth on taboo matters such as this.
Everyone knows it.
Everyone feels it.
Everyone behind the privacy of their closed doors at home feels the way we do.
But we have taken a leadership position on these issues.
We have made them our signature.
And because of it, we have been covered by CNN, Fox News, LA Times, London Times, Newsweek Magazine, you name it.
Litany.
Because we're doing something that no one else is doing.
We are a trailblazing radio program, ladies and gentlemen.
But the credit for that and the credit for whatever success that we have and any success that we've had is directly to you.
You are our enabling force.
You make this show possible.
You allow us to exist.
And we thank you for it because someone ought to be saying these things and pointing out these obvious double standards that so many people see, but so few are afraid to speak out on.
Well, we will always serve as your mainstream voice here on the AM airwaves.
And when we come back, we're going to serve as your mainstream voice, hopefully, being joined by Paul Fromm.
I got a couple of voicemails here.
I'm going to see what he said.
Maybe his cell phone died and he gave me an alternate number.
And we're going to see.
We're going to see what happens.
And we're going to try to catch up with Paul Fromm a segment late, but better late than never.
He's got some good news for us.
And we're going to do our best there in these words from our sponsors to get him on the horn for you.
I'm James Edwards, and I'll be back right after this.
The Political Cesspool, guys.
We'll be back right after these messages.
Welcome back.
To get on the Political Cesspool, call us on James's Dime, toll-free, at 1-866-986-6397.
And here's the host of the Political Cesspool, James Edwards.
All right, welcome back to the show.
Well, this is one of the wonders of live radio.
Every now and then you make a mistake, and the mistake was totally me this time.
I was dialing a wrong number for Paul Fromm in our attempt to reach him last segment, but I do believe we have him now.
Paul, are you there?
Yes, James, I'm here.
My friend, I apologize to you.
If you weren't so important, you wouldn't have to have so many cell phones.
And if you only had one cell phone like me, it wouldn't be so confusing for a guy like myself.
But I'm glad we got you.
I was calling your other cell phone.
You told me the right number.
I called the wrong one.
We got it worked out, and I'm glad we did just in time because you're the star of the show tonight, Paul.
We built the whole show around the news you have to share with us.
And of course, this is a man that needs no introduction to our listening audience.
Paul Fromm has been making regular appearances on this show for five years, among other things.
He is the director for the Canadian Association for Free Expression.
And Paul, you've scored a big victory for the good guys up in Canada.
Tell us all about it.
Yeah, well, Mark Lemier won his judicial review in his internet case.
Now, what this was was a complaint under Canada's very, very repressive Human Rights Act, a complaint against Mark, who is a webmaster, for allegedly, for material that allegedly exposed privileged groups to hatred or contempt.
Now, this law is so draconian that truth is no defense, intent is no defense, and the threshold is so low that sometimes it's called the hate law, but actually it's about remarks that are likely to expose privileged groups to hatred or contempt.
Now, I've defended six people over the past few years on these charges, and believe me, it's almost unwinnable because contempt is a very low threshold.
Any remark that's negative about one of these privileged groups is likely to, to some degree, make you feel less positive toward them, and that's contempt.
And that is, of course, if you believe the remarks.
And they have a very, very simplistic, almost childish approach to communications.
The government doesn't have to prove that anybody actually read your comments on the internet and ever felt anything.
They don't have to prove that anybody ever felt hatred or contempt having read what you read.
And as you know, as a communicator, James, it would be nice if every time you said something, people instantly believed you and ran off and did what you said.
But that's just not the real world.
The real world is we have all sorts of information coming our way.
And sometimes we accept these things.
Sometimes we believe them.
Often we look at them and are skeptical.
Or sometimes we just outright reject them.
And just because something is put up on the internet doesn't mean people instantly change their opinion and go off and commit dreadful acts.
So what happened was that Mark Lanier recognized from my experience with other defendants that the only way to go after this was to go after the law.
So he launched a constitutional challenge saying that the law itself was a violation of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
That is, it violated our right to free speech, free expression, freedom of the press, freedom of belief, and freedom of religion.
Unfortunately, Canada does not have the equivalent of the American First Amendment.
That is, your right to free speech is pretty hard to get around.
In Canada, our rights are subject only to such limitations as are demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Now, if that's got lost your listeners, it's lost most of us.
But the courts have had a field day with this since the charter came in in 1982.
And basically, to make it simple, what it means is this.
Obviously, in a free society, no justification can be limited.
Well, what about a democratic society?
Well, this is where they have lots of fun.
If the government imposes a restriction for a good motive, if it's got a good reason, a good cause, and provided the restriction doesn't go too far, and provided the restriction is in keeping with the goal of the good motive, well, then it's okay.
So the Supreme Court did hear a challenge of this law way back in 1990 when in those days referred only to telephone answering machines, not to the Internet.
And at that time, the Supreme Court upheld it because they bought a load of absolute hooey.
This was a psychological study done back in 1965 by an obscure University of Toronto psychologist named Frederick Kaufman.
And the study argued that hate speech had a very bad effect on minorities.
That it discouraged them, it made them doubt themselves, made them hate themselves, made them, in the end, want to withdraw from society, and at the very extreme end hit the booze and the pills.
And this was bought by the court, locked stock and barrel, and actually has been used as a justification for these laws ever since.
Well, what we did at Mark's hearing was we challenged that science.
We said, look, this is just bogus science.
And we had a very eminent neuropsychologist, Dr. Michael Persinger from Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario.
And he said, well, Kaufman's work was largely theoretical.
It was long on theory and short on empirical evidence.
And he said, you know, neuropsychology, I mean, psychology has come a long way since Kaufman's day.
And neuropsychology allows us to get right into the brain.
I mean, we no longer have to rely on sort of questioning a subject.
Neuropsychology allows us to actually get inside the brain.
And one of your previous guests, Dr. Kevin McDonald, is very knowledgeable about that in his lectured on that as well.
And what we now know, according to Professor Persinger, is that people don't react that way.
He says, I don't even accept the term hate literature.
I call it aversive language.
So that's any language that is negative to your group.
And he says, that's just not the way people react.
When they see a negative comment about their group, they don't suddenly become depressed and no longer want to be who they are and not want to participate in society and so on.
He says Kaufman's justification, Kaufman's work back in 1965 was highly theoretical, and that's being very nice about it.
He said, by the time the Supreme Court accepted it in 1990, he said it was bad science.
And he says today, quite frankly, it's just bullshit.
I mean, just it ain't true.
It just isn't.
And that's the whole justification for these laws.
Well, Mark did a fantastic job.
The defense did an amazing job.
Now, what happened this week is the decision finally came down.
And for the first time ever, after 100 cases and nearly 30 years of repression, for the first time ever, a victim won.
Mark Lemier was cleared of the charges, and we call him a member, but he's actually, you know, he's like a judge, the judge drew out the law as unconstitutional.
Unfortunately, he ignored much of the really great evidence that we brought in, but he threw it out on narrow grounds.
But, you know, as I said to Mark, you know, you might prefer to win the game 10 to nothing, but will still take 9 to 8 because it's in the win column.
But basically what the judge decided was the Supreme Court upheld the law very narrowly back in 1990.
And they upheld it largely because it was what they called remedial.
This is human rights legislation, and they said it doesn't have the negative image of criminal conviction.
It is really just remedial.
And that's why intent doesn't matter.
If there's a remark that is likely to uphold one of these protected groups or privileged groups to hatred or contempt, well, all this law does is it says, well, look, there ought to be mediation.
You ought to get the two sides together.
And maybe you'll be a good guy.
And you'll say, oh, okay, I'll take that remark down or I'll change my message.
And everybody walks away happy.
And it's only if you absolutely refuse that then they have a tribunal to decide whether or not the remark is likely to expose the group to hatred or contempt.
And then all they could do in those days was to pass a cease and desist order against you, which has the effect of a court order.
And if you disobey that, then that is contempt, of course, and it can put you in jail.
But it was supposed to be remedial.
And so the court said, well, even though it is restrictive in some ways, it doesn't go too far.
And the whole purpose is remediation.
Well, in the meantime, of course, they added the internet to this.
It's no longer a telephone answering machine.
And they added fines.
You can be fined up to $10,000 for posting what you did.
Then they added something called retaliation.
Paul, I hate to interrupt.
I hate to interrupt.
I know we've still got some ground to cover, and I was a segment late calling you, but we've got to take a commercial break.
Can you sit tight and head over into one segment into the next hour?
Sure.
All right, set tight.
We're going to take a break.
We've got a blast of national news coming from IRN, and we'll be right back, ladies and gentlemen.
Here's a third hour of tonight's installment of the political cesspool coming your way right after these messages.