Hate Crimes Bill Coming To A Country Near You. Wait, It's Already Here!

Ezra Levant and his conservative colleagues are staying mum about the Hate Crimes Bill that is underway in the United States.

Well, Canada has its own Hate Crime Code. From Wikipedia:

Since 1966 the Canadian Criminal Code has included a penalty-enhancement provision for crimes "motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on racial group, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or any other similar factor."...

Section 319, adopting the same definition of 'identifiable group,'...defined to mean 'any section of the public distinguished by skin color, racial group, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation'... punishes the incitement or expression of hatred against such a group.

The difference between the HRCs’ method and the courts’ method is that the HRCs are fraudulent, and the courts will go through "due process." But due process for “hates crimes?" Doesn't that make a mockery of the courts?

As I've said before, it is not enough to dismantle the HRCs. There is a depth of problems to address, including the Canadian Multiculturalism Act and the Canadian Human Rights Act, which both feed into the HRCs, and would function in a similar manner as the HRCs without the HRCs.

And I maintain that these days, it is the high levels of immigration that is sustaining the HRCs, and, the two Acts mentioned above in turn sustain the HRCs (please see the side column titled “Issues” to have a comprehensive list of topics on immigration and the HRCs).

Now, back to the United States. Without a Multiculturalism Act, a Human Rights Act, or an established Human Rights Commission, law makers and politicians have still found a way to install (or try to install) a Hate Crimes Bill.

Here is what Attorney General Eric Holder has to say about the proposed Hate Crimes Bill:

Under questioning, Attorney Gen. Holder was surprisingly forthright in admitting that the hate bill is not intended to protect everyone, or even the majority. He said only historically oppressed minorities were to benefit. This means Jews, blacks, homosexuals, women, etc.

And even more insidious:

Holder made it clear that if a white Christian male, including a serviceman or police officer, was the victim of a violent hate crime by any minority he would have to find redress from traditional law. He could not avail himself of the triple penalties and rapid government/justice system response given a protected minority.

The HRCs aren't the problem, they are the symptom. This is what I'm trying to get Levant and Canadian conservatives to see.