Ahenakew acquitted of promoting hatred: A good decision!

[HOZ]

Whatever you think of his opinion he has the RIGHT to it and should have never been persecuted in the first place. Now hopefully he will crawl into a cave somewhere.

Acquitted!
A Saskatoon judge acquitted David Ahenakew Monday on a charge of promoting hatred against Jews, but denounced comments the former aboriginal leader made in a speech and subsequent interview six years ago.
Ahenakew, the former head of the Assembly of First Nations, was charged after making inflammatory comments during a 2002 speech and interview with a journalist.
In his comments, the 75-year-old blamed Jews for the Second World War, called them a "disease" and seemed to justify the Holocaust.

[Thor]

Good to hear, the guy's a dirtbag but like has been said I'd rather have free speech than have to thought police.

[PsYcNeT]

He's right though.

If us greasy heebs hadn't hoarded all the money, there wouldn't have been economic collapse leading to proletariat disenchantment in Europe in the 30's.

[JoseCuervo]

I definatly disagree. Just because we have the freedom of speech, does not mean we have a freedom to promote hate. Theres definatly a difference. Anyone can say anything they want to a degree, but he definatly crossed the line.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Whatever you think of his opinion he has the RIGHT to it and should have never been persecuted in the first place. Now hopefully he will crawl into a cave somewhere.

Acquitted!
A Saskatoon judge acquitted David Ahenakew Monday on a charge of promoting hatred against Jews, but denounced comments the former aboriginal leader made in a speech and subsequent interview six years ago.
Ahenakew, the former head of the Assembly of First Nations, was charged after making inflammatory comments during a 2002 speech and interview with a journalist.
In his comments, the 75-year-old blamed Jews for the Second World War, called them a "disease" and seemed to justify the Holocaust.

I rarely disagree with you, but then you must not have a problem with the white supremacist rallies in Calgary, or Clan gatherings?

If the courts are going to acquit him then the hate speech laws in Canada no longer exist. Just because Ahenakew isn't part of a actual hate group doesn't give him rights to free speech above these groups does it?

Hey don't get me wrong, I'm all about free speech, but either we have hate laws or we don't. They can't just apply to the more unpalatable groups.

[kipperiggy]

Yes, we all have the right to free speech, but we do not have the right to promote hatred.

Mr. Ahenakew, though exercising one of his rights, was a public figure at the time. Although NO person should be promoting hatred, the fact that a public leader did so and is now acquitted completely mocks our justice system.

[longsuffering]

His comments, at least as reported in the link provided, are no worse than literally dozens of comments directed at Muslims posted on these forums.

His comments are obviously wrong and misinformed but if the test of promoting hatred is intention, then I think the judge ruled correctly.

Its disingenuous to compare Ahenakew's comments to White Supremest or Clan rallys - because of the intent and the ongoing nature of their hate speech.

[flylock shox]

Not being very familiar with the background to this trial, the following passage from the article was helpful:

The controversy began in December 2002, when Ahenakew gave a speech in Saskatoon during a health conference held by the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations.

The topic of the conference was a federal government proposal that would require aboriginals to sign medical consent forms.

In his speech, Ahenakew blamed Jews for causing the Second World War. A newspaper reporter later asked him to clarify his remarks.

"How do you get rid of a disease like that, that's going to take over, that's going to dominate?" Ahenakew said to the reporter. "The Jews damn near owned all of Germany prior to the war. That's how Hitler came in. He was going to make damn sure that the Jews didn't take over Germany or Europe.
"That's why he fried six million of those guys, you know. Jews would have owned the God-damned world."

Despite issuing a tearful apology, Ahenakew's comments cost him his position as a senator with the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations, as well as his Order of Canada, which was taken from him after his first conviction. However, he has not returned his Order of Canada pin to officials.

Obviously brutal, brutal remarks. But I wouldn't think they go so far as to be classified as hate-speech (though I confess to being ignorant with respect to Canada's hate speech laws). He doesn't actually incite anyone to act hatefully towards Jews so much as he paints historical events with his own hateful brush. What I found most interesting was the point on which the case apparently turned:

In his ruling, [Justice] Tucker said he believed that Ahenakew did not intend to promote hate because he had not planned to speak to the reporter about his speech and had tried to end the interview.

Tucker also said he believed the comments Ahenakew made in his speech were not premeditated.

This suggests you can have your hateful opinions, and speak them, but you can't do it with the intent to incite hatred, and you can't bring up the subject in a premeditated way. But if someone asks you an honest question, you can give your honest bigoted answer.

[Rifleman]

Good decision. We either allow the expression of all opinions and views, regardless of how obtuse and ignorant, or our claim to "free speech" becomes a complete joke.

The old ignorant Injun has a right to hate Jews, and we have the right to ridicule him for his uninformed and racist opinions.

[photon]

What does incite hatred mean anyway? Wouldn't inciting an actual behaviour (such as violence) be a better measure?

Outlawing inciting hatred is kind of close to making hatred illegal.. if it's illegal to encourage someone to hate someone else...

[GGG]

Living in Saskatchewan at the time I remember it being a comparison on how white people took over the native people. Akenenhew if I remember correctly was very anti negotiating with the government and wanted all aspects of the treaties enforced.

I never thought at the time he meant it to incite hatred.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I rarely disagree with you, but then you must not have a problem with the white supremacist rallies in Calgary, or Clan gatherings?

If the courts are going to acquit him then the hate speech laws in Canada no longer exist. Just because Ahenakew isn't part of a actual hate group doesn't give him rights to free speech above these groups does it?

Hey don't get me wrong, I'm all about free speech, but either we have hate laws or we don't. They can't just apply to the more unpalatable groups.

No, I have a problem with those meatballs. But, they have a right to express their stupidity to the world and I have a right to call them meatballs. Hate laws are there to stop people from actively calling(inciting) for the death of others. See Rwanda for a good example of how incitement works.

Ahenakew didn't do this. He expressed his opinion, offensive as it is. You and I or anyone do not have the right NOT to be offended.

Basically, I go by the idea that it is far more dangerous to prevent people from expressing hateful ideas than having those ideas out in the open and belittled in the public domain. Hitler didn't come about because people didn't try to stop his ideas. They actually kept on sticking him in jail and banning his words.

[Canada 02]

not familiar with this case other than what is provided in the link and about 10 minutes worth of googling

is there a difference between Ahenakew and Jim Keegstra who was convicted

[octothorp]

After reading Flylock's post, I tend to agree with the decision. The law doesn't have any say over what our opinions are, (nor should it), and when asked for your opinion, it's acceptable to cite your opinion, even if you yourself are full of hate. However, seeking out a platform for it (speaking to a rally, or even calling up a reporter and proclaiming your opinion) would be hateful, as I understand the judge's interpretation.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

not familiar with this case other than what is provided in the link and about 10 minutes worth of googling

is there a difference between Ahenakew and Jim Keegstra who was convicted

Yes there is. Keegstra was a teacher and taught his beliefs to children in a public school, therefore was promoting hatred.

[VladtheImpaler]

I would say Ahenakew is certainly guilty of being a moron, but as to inciting/promoting hatred... meh.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

is there a difference between Ahenakew and Jim Keegstra who was convicted

As Hoz said, Keegstra was teaching it. Though, as a tribal leader, one has to wonder what Ahenakew was teaching as well.

As far as this decision goes, meh. The only issue is whether this racist moron decides on whether he now has the "right" to spread his garbage or whether he crawls under a rock and disappears. Preferably the latter.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by HOZ

No, I have a problem with those meatballs. But, they have a right to express their stupidity to the world and I have a right to call them meatballs. Hate laws are there to stop people from actively calling(inciting) for the death of others. See Rwanda for a good example of how incitement works.

Originally Posted by HOZ

Yes there is. Keegstra was a teacher and taught his beliefs to children in a public school, therefore was promoting hatred.

See, there you go contradicting yourself and / or not understanding.

First you say hate laws are there "to stop people from actively calling(inciting) for the death of others" and then hold up Keegstra as someone promoting hatred when he never did actively call for the death of anyone.

From only reading the above article, the difference seems to be that Ahenakew didn't go into the interview expecting or intending to discuss his hateful opinions and have them published (i.e. no intent to promote), whereas Keegstra taught his hateful beliefs with the intent that his students adopt them, apparently demanding those sorts of answers on exams.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Rifleman

The old ignorant Injun has a right to hate Jews, and we have the right to ridicule him for his uninformed and racist opinions.

I have a problem with that theory. There is a thread on CP regarding this guy being acquitted. I don't see the thread ridiculing his uninformed racist opinions. Had this not gone to trial and put this out there in the public forum, his opinions would have gone unchallenged. When hate speech goes unchallenged, people start buying in and hatred spreads.

So unless you have attended a rally condemning Mr. Ahenakew's statements, or written a letter to the editor or otherwise countered these racist ideas in a public forum, then we have let this go uncontested.

It puts the responsibility back on the public to condemn these things and the public is notorious for shrugging their shoulders and ignoring racism. The courts less so. If you HAVE written a letter to the editor of your local paper condemning Mr. Ahenakew's opinions, I stand corrected.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

His comments, at least as reported in the link provided, are no worse than literally dozens of comments directed at Muslims posted on these forums.

His comments are obviously wrong and misinformed but if the test of promoting hatred is intention, then I think the judge ruled correctly.

Its disingenuous to compare Ahenakew's comments to White Supremest or Clan rallys - because of the intent and the ongoing nature of their hate speech.

I am not sure where you got any of your so called facts from, but can you please post the dozens of posts in this forum that his comments were no worse than?

His comments are not just wrong and misinformed, they have a purpose, to promote hate. What else could his intention be? He was a politician when he said them. His comments are just as bad as the supremacist /clan rallys, except he is Native.