Warman v. Kouba

Warman v. Kouba
Collection
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Date
2006-11-22
Neutral citation
2006 CHRT 50
File number(s)
T1071/5205
Decision-maker(s)
Jensen, Karen A.
Decision Content
CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL TRIBUNAL CANADIEN DES DROITS DE LA PERSONNE
RICHARD WARMAN
Complainant
- and - CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
Commission
- and - peter kouba
Respondent
REASONS FOR DECISION
MEMBER: Karen A. Jensen
2006 CHRT 50 2006/11/22
I. WHAT IS THE COMPLAINT ABOUT?
II. WHAT ARE THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT GAVE RISE TO THE COMPLAINT?
III. WHO APPEARED AT THE HEARING?
IV. WHAT QUESTIONS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THIS CASE?
A. Question 1 - Can the Tribunal consider material that post-dates the filing of the complaint?
B. Question 2 - Is the Material Likely to Expose Members of the Targeted Groups to Hatred or Contempt?
(i) The Hallmarks of Hate Messages
(ii) The Tribunal's Conclusion Regarding the Messages
C. Question 3 - Did the Respondent, Peter Kouba, communicate the hate messages?
(i) The Evidence of Sergeant Stephen Camp
(ii) The Evidence Presented by the Complainant and the Commission
(iii) The Respondent's Explanation
(iv) The Tribunal's Conclusion Regarding the Identity of the Communicator of the Hate Messages
V. REMEDY
APPENDIX A
I. WHAT IS THE COMPLAINT ABOUT? [1] This complaint is about whether Peter Kouba, using the pseudonyms proud18 and WhiteEuroCanadian, communicated hate messages over the Internet, contrary to s. 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act (the Act).
[2] On June 8, 2004, Richard Warman filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) alleging that from October 7, 2003 until June 2004 and ongoing, Peter Kouba communicated material on two Internet sites - www.stormfront.org (stormfront.org) and www.westerncanadaforus.com - that exposed First Nations people, East Asians, Pakistanis, Roma (also known as Gypsies) and other non-white people, as well as gays and lesbians and people of the Muslim, Hindu and Jewish faiths to hatred or contempt.
[3] The Respondent denied that he communicated the messages. He alleged that the impugned messages were passed off as his own. He also alleged that he was not the kind of person who would communicate material that would expose a person to hatred or contempt.
[4] In addition to presenting evidence of the alleged hate messages, the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) and the Complainant led evidence relating to the identity of the person who communicated the messages.
[5] For the reasons that follow, I find that the material presented during the hearing into this complaint violates s. 13 of the Act. I also find that it was the Respondent, Peter Kouba, using the pseudonyms proud18 and WhiteEuroCanadian who communicated the impugned material over the Internet.
II. WHAT ARE THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT GAVE RISE TO THE COMPLAINT? [6] The Complainant testified that since the late 1990's he has had an interest in human rights, particularly in connection with the distribution of hate messages by those ascribing to white supremacist and neo-Nazi beliefs. This interest has led him to monitor the Internet for material that he regards as hate propaganda.
[7] In the course of monitoring the Internet in 2003, the Complainant came across material on a website at www.stormfront.org that appeared to have been communicated by an individual living in Edmonton, Alberta. This individual was using the pseudonym proud18.
[8] The Complainant testified that stormfront.org is an international website, based in the United States. It provides forums, which are sites on the Internet where people from around the world can communicate on-line about issues relating to white supremacy and neo-Nazi ideology. There are forums within stormfront.org that are dedicated to specific countries. The material communicated by proud18 was found on the Canadian forum of stormfront.org.
[9] Within a forum, there is a list of threads or topics of discussion. The list is organized in chronological order with the thread containing the most recent message, which is also known as a posting, at the top of the list. The Complainant testified that any member of the public could read the postings within a thread on the Canadian forum of stormfront.org.
[10] The Complainant stated that in the summer and fall of 2003, he became concerned about the material that was being posted on the Canadian forum of stormfront.org by proud18 for a number of reasons. First, the kind of language that was being used by this individual in relation to Aboriginal Canadians, the Jewish community, homosexuals and other minority groups was extremely negative and threatening. The responses on the forum to proud18's postings were calling for the genocide of some groups, such as homosexuals and the mentally disabled. Furthermore, there were indications in proud18's postings that the author was part of a group, known as Western Canada For Us (WCFU) that was planning neo-Nazi and white supremacist actions and events in the Alberta region.
[11] The Complainant testified that in February 2004, it became evident that WCFU was also developing a website. In March 2004, the Complainant found the WCFU website on the Internet for the first time. On a page in the forum section of that website, the Complainant viewed what he considered to be hate messages directed towards gay and lesbian people. This material was posted by someone using the pseudonym WhiteEuroCanadian, who was designated as a moderator. The Complainant believed that WhiteEuroCanadian was the same individual who went by the moniker proud18 on the stormfront.org website. He believed that this individual was the Respondent, Peter Kouba. The Complainant testified that postings on the WCFU Forum could be viewed by anyone regardless of whether the person was a member of Western Canada For Us.
[12] The Complainant expressed his concerns about the messages on stormfront.org and the WCFU websites to the Edmonton Police Hate Crimes Unit and then, in June 2004, he filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
III. WHO APPEARED AT THE HEARING? [13] The Commission fully participated at the hearing into the complaint and was represented by counsel. The Complainant also participated but was not represented by legal counsel, although it should be noted that he is a lawyer by profession.
[14] The Respondent did not attend the first day of the hearing. At the outset of the hearing, an Affidavit of Service was filed indicating that he had been personally served with a Notice of the case conference on June 9, 2006 to discuss the upcoming hearing, a Notice of Venue indicating the exact location and dates of the hearing and a Tribunal letter outlining the procedure for the hearing. On that basis, I was satisfied that the Respondent had been provided with ample notice of the inquiry into the complaint as required by s. 50 of the Act. The hearing then proceeded on the first day in the Respondent's absence.
[15] On the second day of the hearing, the Respondent appeared. He was not represented by counsel or an agent. The Respondent cross-examined the Complainant and made submissions in closing argument. He chose however, not to testify or to call any evidence on his own behalf.
IV. WHAT QUESTIONS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THIS CASE? [16] The following three questions must be addressed in this case:
Can the Tribunal consider material that post-dates the filing of the complaint? Is the material likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that they are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination? Did the Respondent, Peter Kouba, communicate the material?
A. Question 1 - Can the Tribunal consider material that post-dates the filing of the complaint? [17] The Complainant testified that he viewed the material on the stormfront.org and WCFU websites between October 9, 2003 and March 30, 2006. Material that post-dated the filing of the complaint in June 2004 was submitted as evidence of the ongoing violation of s. 13 as alleged in the complaint form. The complaint form, therefore, provided notice to the Respondent that material that was communicated after the date of the complaint would be tendered as evidence.
[18] Prior to the first day of the hearing, the Commission attempted to disclose the post-complaint material to the Respondent by electronic mail, but received notification that the Respondent's e-mail system was unable to receive the material. The material was subsequently mailed to him and he was provided with a copy of the material when he arrived at the hearing on the second day.
[19] Although the Respondent denied having communicated the post-complaint material, he did not object to its production on the basis that he had been given insufficient notice of the material. Given therefore, that the evidence relates to the ongoing nature of the alleged violations of the Act, and the fact that the Respondent had notice through the complaint form and the disclosure of the material that additional material would be presented during the hearing, I find that it is appropriate for the Tribunal to consider the evidence that post-dates the filing of the complaint.
B. Question 2 - Is the Material Likely to Expose Members of the Targeted Groups to Hatred or Contempt? [20] Section 13 of the Act makes it a discriminatory practice for a person to communicate by means of the Internet, material that is likely to expose someone to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that he or she is identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
[21] Hatred has been defined as a feeling of deep ill-will, an emotion that allows for no redeeming qualities in the person to whom it is directed. Contempt suggests looking down upon or treating as inferior the object of one's feelings (Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892 at paras. 60 - 61). Material is likely to expose members of the targeted group to hatred or contempt if it is more likely than not to leave members of the targeted group vulnerable to extreme ill-will, or if it creates the conditions in which hatred and contempt are likely to flourish (Citron v. Zundel, (No. 4) (2002), 41 C.H.R.R. D/274 at para. 134).
[22] An analysis of the growing body of s. 13 jurisprudence reveals that there are a number of hallmarks of material that is more likely than not to expose members of the targeted group to hatred or contempt. It may be useful at this point to provide a list of these hallmarks along with some examples from the case law to illustrate each point. The list is by no means exhaustive. It may, however, provide a useful context for the legal determination at hand.
[23] After each hallmark is presented, a description and analysis of the material in the present case that displays this hallmark is provided. It should be noted that a significant number of postings were entered into evidence during the hearing. Many were too lengthy to reproduce in the body of this decision. Therefore, I have provided descriptions and short excerpts of the postings made by proud18 and WhiteEuroCanadian in my analysis. Further detail and content of the messages are provided in Appendix A of this Decision.
(i) The Hallmarks of Hate Messages (a) The targeted group is portrayed as a powerful menace that is taking control of the major institutions in society and depriving others of their livelihoods, safety, freedom of speech and general well-being
[24] The powerful menace theme is a common theme in cases where people of the Jewish faith have been the target of hate messages. For example, in Citron v. Zundel, supra, the messages expounded the theory that Jewish people operate a secret conspiracy designed to extort money and amass tremendous power and control on a global level. In that case, Jewish people were said to have duped the world into believing that the Nazi Holocaust took place in order to extort billions of dollars from countries in reparation. Jews were branded as liars, swindlers, racketeers and extortionists. The Tribunal found that such messages created the conditions in which hatred and contempt toward Jewish people would flourish since they encouraged people to think of Jews as a group of liars, cheats, criminals and thugs (Zundel, supra, at para. 140).
[25] The portrayal of the targeted group as a powerful menace can also be seen in Schnell v. Machiavelli and Associates Emprize Inc. (2002), 43 C.H.R.R. D/453, where the impugned messages warned readers that homosexuals have an agenda. That agenda was to have pedophilia legalized (Schnell, supra, at para. 36). Again, the implication is that without realizing it, the Canadian public was being tricked into allowing their children to be victimized. The Tribunal found that this created the conditions for hatred and contempt to flourish.
Does the Material in the Present Case Bear the Powerful Menace Hallmark?
[26] Proud18's postings on stormfront.org about Aboriginal Canadians bear the powerful menace hallmark. They accuse the members of this group of extorting billions of dollars from Canadian taxpayers and claiming title to land that was never theirs. They warn readers not to fall into a guilt trap that has been set by Aboriginal people. For example, in a posting dated October 7, 2003, within a thread entitled If you don't like injuns, Then don't read this, proud 18 states:
Now if you like the dream of the cartoon native Indian then do not read any further. It will show you how primitive these savages truly are.
Injun Phil Fontaine is demanding close to $2 billion more a year for 600 1st. nation [600? That's the count Ottawa gives. One thing that puzzles me about this number is that 150 years ago there wasn't close to even half those numbers], These injuns are breaking away from their tribes and forming new ones. They then get a min, of a hundred million and so on ... Why should we have to pay these new off-tribes?
On top of the close to $8 Billion a year they get already for as they say Spent on native programs to fulfil treaty and constitutional obligations.
What efen obligation?
We have over the years given them hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars/ prime land / royalties / tax free living / lifetime welfare on top of their reserve money.
And yet they live like savages. Maybe there are a few clean ones out there ... MAYBE.
And another on top of these injuns keep beaking off about how much more money they want.
Billions of dollars down the drain. Hell give ten WHITE educated people a billion dollars and watch empires begin to form. And these injuns keep whinning about the high cost of LYSOL. (sic throughout)
[27] In a posting dated November 23, 2003, proud18 alleges that the extortion of money from White Canadians by Aboriginal Canadians has resulted in the demise of the Canadian health care and education systems.
[28] Similarly, proud18's messages about Jewish people mirror the powerful menace image that is portrayed in other hate message cases. Jewish people are said to control the media, the education system and our governments, thereby putting the non-Jewish population in grave danger. Jewish control over these institutions is alleged to be the reason that individual rights are being suppressed. For example, in a posting dated November 23, 2003, within a thread entitled What will it take to motivate us? proud18 writes:
We all have our storys of how crapy it is where we live. We have less and less rights. Hell we are a endangered species. Whites by popullation are the biggest minority in the world. Jews have taken over our education, our media, our governments, etc. (sic throughout)
[29] Like other messages bearing this hallmark, proud18's messages about Aboriginal Canadians and Jewish people attempt to generate feelings of outrage at being robbed and duped by a sinister group of people. In this way, the messages bearing this hallmark create the conditions for hatred of members of these groups to flourish.
(b) The messages use true stories, news reports, pictures and references from purportedly reputable sources to make negative generalizations about the targeted group.
[30] Messages that make use of allegedly true stories, news reports, pictures and references to apparently reputable sources in an attempt to lend an air of objectivity and truthfulness to the extremely negative characterization of the targeted group have been found to be likely to expose members of the targeted group to hatred and contempt. They encourage readers to accept, without question, gross generalizations and stereotypes about the targeted group.
[31] For example, in Warman v.Winnicki 2006 CHRT 20, the Respondent made use of graphic photographic images of burned and dismembered people of African origin to convey his message that when an African person comes to live in Canada, he or she will inevitably bring violence and death. The Tribunal found that this increased the likelihood that members of the African community would be exposed to hatred or contempt since the images evoked strong feelings of revulsion and disgust (Warman v. Winnicki, supra, at para. 90).
[32] In that same case, the respondent quoted from online news reports about crimes and events involving members of the targeted groups. The Tribunal found that the use of newspaper articles as evidence supporting the respondent's statements lent a certain appearance of legitimacy to his messages. This, the Tribunal held, enhanced the persuasiveness of the messages and increased the likelihood that the messages would expose members of the targeted group to hatred and contempt (Warman v. Winnicki, supra, at para. 82).
Does the material in the present case bear the true story hallmark?
[33] Proud18 attempts to use true stories and news reports to justify the unfounded and racist generalization that most crime in Canada is committed by Aboriginal people. For example, in a posting dated February 11, 2004, proud18 recounts an allegedly true story reported in the news about an Aboriginal man whose murder sentence was reduced on appeal. Proud18 concludes as follows: ... if you are a injun you can get away with murder just because one is a injun. No wonder they commit most of the crime in Canada. They have the courts on their side and they act like it. Canada needs saving ASAP.
[34] In another posting on stormfront.org dated November 30, 2003, proud18 starts a thread entitled Indians sought in murder of 70 year old. The posting recounts an allegedly true news story about the murder of a 70 year old woman in her home. Proud18 states:
Police are on the lookout for two injuns [so what else is new] who were seen running down the alley from her home. Now the doctors are scared to tell the 90 year old mother that her daughter was killed because they fear that she will die due to a broken heart. They only had each other in this world. (sic throughout)
[35] Proud18 draws the following conclusions:
It happened in Edmonton, I find that the Prarie injun is the killer/rapist type more then Ontario. But when it boils down to it they are all savages. (sic throughout)
[36] Proud18 also makes use of apparently true news stories to convey a negative message about Black people. For example, in a posting dated November 30, 2003 within a thread entitled 2 black serial rapists of white women, proud18 recounts a story that was allegedly reported in the news, stating: two bald nigs have been raping women in the Clearview part of town. This leads proud18 to ask: How come the feds can say that most serial killers are white males but you can't even make it pubic that in Canada over 50% of the rapes are committed by blacks?
[37] In a posting dated January 4, 2004 on stormfront.org, proud18 describes a media report about the serious injury and deaths that allegedly occurred during a gang fight involving people of the Hindu faith. According to the posting, the media report states that a White woman was involved with the gang and was also killed. In another posting on stormfront.org dated May 2, 2004, proud18 comments on a report in the media that a person of the Hindu faith had allegedly transmitted HIV/AIDS to three women. Proud18 uses these news items to make the point that if White women associate with people of the Hindu faith, they are race traitors and deserve to die.
[38] The use of allegedly true stories to justify extremely negative conclusions about members of the targeted groups is a powerful means of exposing them to hatred because it may seem to some readers that the conclusions are justified in light of the evidence provided by the stories and reports. The stories are often anecdotal in nature and devoid of any contextual details or background that might lessen the impact or weaken the inferences that are sought to be drawn.
[39] In numerous postings, proud18 encourages readers to join him in sharing their negative stories and experiences with Aboriginal people on the forum, so that any white nationalists who might be harbouring positive feelings toward Aboriginal people might be disabused of such feelings. It would appear, therefore, that the goal of such communications is to expose members of the targeted group to hatred or contempt.
(c) The targeted group is portrayed as preying upon children, the aged, the vulnerable, etc.
[40] In Schnell, supra, the messages stated that gay and lesbian people lure children into pedophilia and homosexuality. Similarly, in Payzant et al. v. McAleer and Canadian Liberty Net, 26 C.H.R.R. D/271, Aff'd 26 C.H.R.R. D/280 (F.C.T.D.), the messages were presented in such a way as to establish an association between pedophilia and homosexuality. This set the stage for a message calling for the execution of homosexuals. The Tribunal found that the association between pedophilia and homosexuality primed the recipient of the messages with disgust towards homosexuals, thereby rendering it more likely that message recipients would find the execution of homosexuals to be not such a bad idea, maybe (Payzant et al, supra, at para. 38).
[41] In Warman v. Kyburz, 2003 CHRT 18, the messages graphically described the filming of the sexual torture and rape of children for the purpose of producing pornography, and then made the claim that although not all consumers of child pornography are Jewish people, Jews are disproportionately represented among them (Warman v. Kyburz, supra, at paras. 25 and 26). The Tribunal found that such messages could only serve to foster hatred against Jewish people.
Does the material in the present case bear the predator hallmark?
[42] Some of the material in this case bears the predator hallmark. In a posting dated December 1, 2003, proud18 portrays Black men as cannibals and head-hunters who have sex with animals; when they cannot do this, they resort to raping white women. Ominously, proud18 declares at the end of this posting that this [Black man] is what is moving in next door to you.
[43] WhiteEuroCanadian's material on the WCFU website regarding gay and lesbian people also bears the predator hallmark. In a posting on that website dated March 9, 2004, WhiteEuroCanadian declares that homosexual people are not human beings, they are sexual perverts in the [same] category as pedophiles, bestiality, S&M, etc. It is because of this alleged tendency to prey on children that WhiteEuroCanadian states that he is opposed to homosexual people being daycare workers, babysitters, teachers, bosses, etc.
[44] Like the material in other hate message cases that bears this hallmark, the material in the present case that characterizes the targeted groups as sexual predators plays on the intense fear that people have that children, women and vulnerable people will fall victim to the criminal and violent sexual impulses of the targeted groups. This makes it highly likely that members of the targeted groups will be exposed to deep feelings of hatred.
(d) The targeted group is blamed for the current problems in society and the world
[45] In Warman v. Alexan Kulbashian et al, 2006 CHRT 11, some of the messages blamed Jewish and Muslim people for the death, on September 11, 2001, of thousands of white folk in the World Trade Center in New York. The messages encouraged racialists to engage in violent acts against members of these groups. The Tribunal found that by equating all Jewish and Muslim people with the terrorists responsible for the 9/11 attacks, the messages unquestionably exposed these people to hatred, contempt and real physical danger, as they suggested that all members of those communities would be legitimate targets of indiscriminate retributory violence (Warman v. Kulbashian, supra, at para. 55). The messages were also designed to tap into and exploit pre-existing feelings of anger and fear that were felt in Canada after the attacks.
[46] Some of the messages in Taylor and the Western Guard Party v. Canadian Human Rights Commission and Attorney General of Canada (1979), T.D. 1/79, linked the integration of non-White races into Canadian society to the decline in the quality of health care services. The Tribunal noted that the persuasive effect of these messages was generated by the fact that they linked the race problem to a particular problem in the country which might have been adversely affecting the recipients of the messages. Similarly, in that case, hatred or contempt toward Jewish people was fostered by attributing to them the blame for unemployment, inflation and the encroaching Third World War, three of what were seen as the most pressing problems in the world at the time.
Does the material in the present case bear the cause of society's problems hallmark?
[47] In proud18's postings on stormfront.org, the assertion is made that if Aboriginal people were not draining the Canadian economy of 10's of billions of dollars, the health care and education systems in Canada would be better. Proud18's postings also blame Jewish people, through their alleged control over the education system, the media and government, for robbing Canadians of their fundamental right to free speech. Similarly, in a posting dated November 30, 2003 entitled Muslim women break our laws on stormfront.org, proud18 asserts that because Muslim women are permitted to cover their faces in public, they are able to commit anonymous acts of terrorism like throwing grenades. In that posting, proud18 deplores the Canadian government for allowing the threat of terrorism in disguise into Canada.
[48] These messages provide readers with scapegoats for the world's problems by providing an outlet for strong negative emotions; they tap into these emotions and divert them towards the targeted groups. In this way they foster and legitimize hatred toward members of the targeted groups.
(e) The targeted group is portrayed as dangerous or violent by nature
[49] In Warman v. Winnicki, supra, the Respondent made use of graphic photographic images of burned and dismembered people of African origin to convey his message that when any African person comes to live in Canada, he or she will inevitably bring violence and death. The Tribunal found that this increased the likelihood that members of the African community would be exposed to hatred or contempt since the images evoked strong feelings of revulsion and disgust (Warman v. Winnicki, supra, at para. 90).
Does the material in the present case bear the dangerous or violent by nature hallmark?
[50] All of the groups targeted by the material in the present case are characterized, in one way or another, as dangerous or violent by nature. Aboriginal people are said to commit the majority of crime in Canada, while Black men are said to be responsible for 50% of all rapes (the other 50% allegedly being the fault of Aboriginal men). Asian people are portrayed as murdering gang members, Muslim people are characterized as terrorists and Jewish people are said to be taking control of Canadian society. On that basis, taking action against these groups is justified by proud18. Similarly, WhiteEuroCanadian characterizes homosexual people as pedophiles and argues that others should not be subjected to sexual divients (sic) like homosexuals.
(f) The messages convey the idea that members of the targeted group are devoid of any redeeming qualities and are innately evil
[51] In Warman v. Kyburz, supra, at para. 34, one of the messages portrayed Zionist Jews as having no redeeming qualities whatsoever because: being frauds, criminals, war mongers, pedophiles, anti-life and full of hate is part of them ... It is their nature. They will not and cannot change. The Tribunal found that when read in context, these messages tell the reader that Jewish people are innately devious, treacherous, and murderous. Not only do they want to kidnap, corrupt, and kill white children, their ultimate goal is to take over the world. (Warman v. Kyburz, supra, at para. 48). The Tribunal found that such messages served to foster hatred against Jewish people.
Does the material in the present case bear the no redeeming qualities hallmark?
[52] All of the messages in the present case bear this hallmark in that they characterize the targeted groups in resoundingly negative terms and do not suggest, in any way, that the members might possess any redeeming qualities.
[53] Proud18's postings regarding Aboriginal Canadians are particularly pointed in this regard. In a posting dated November 18, 2003, within a thread entitled Native Robbery proud 18 states: Sooner or later those Indians all break the law, its in their DNA to be bad. In another posting, proud18 rhetorically asks those who like these savages for an example of ONE benefit they have and one lousy contribution to society. Proud18 responds to the question in the following way: Just one instance that a injun is good, ... I can hear a pin drop in the forest with this defining (sic) silence.
[54] In yet another posting dated October 11, 2003 within the thread entitled If you don't like Injuns, then don't read this proud18 writes:
So all you wn who love the injuns, keep passing this thread because you would see that your so called proud native is nothing but a waste of time and a drain on the rest of the population. Hell give them a whole province and those lazy s***** would die out in less then two generations without our handouts. (sic throughout)
[55] Proud18's postings about Roma state that Roma are a fithy group of Hindus. According to proud18, they are thieves, murderers, pimps and molesters who were exiled from the Czech Republic and sent to Canada on the promise of free health care and education.
[56] The messages in this case foster the attitude that members of the targeted groups are so devoid of any redeeming characteristics that extreme hatred or contempt toward them is entirely justified. Furthermore, they convey the idea that is hopeless to expect civilized, law-abiding or productive behaviour from the targeted groups and they ridicule any reader who might harbour even a partially open mind towards members of the groups.
(g) The messages communicate the idea that nothing but the banishment, segregation or eradication of this group of people will save others from the harm being done by this group
[57] In Nealy v. Johnston, (1989), 10 C.H.R.R. D/6450, the messages claimed that non-white immigrants were pre-human and that they were allowed entry into Canada by the Jewish conspiracy in order to perpetrate the legalized racial genocide against the White race. The messages stated that the only solution was the forced deportation of non-white immigrants, or at the very least their segregation from the White population. The Tribunal found that such messages encouraged violence as a proactive means of defense against any who were seen as the enemies of racial purity (Nealy v. Johnston, supra, at para. 45668).
Does the material in the present case bear the hallmark of calling for banishment, segregation or eradication of the targeted group?
[58] In a posting on stormfront.org dated February 27, 2004, proud18 suggests that Aboriginal Canadians should be given a one-way ticket to Asia and a case of Lysol / glue and they wont (sic) know where they are going. Proud18 concludes as follows: Then we could regain our rightful place as the first white Euro people on this continent.
[59] In another posting, proud18 asserts that Aboriginal people should not be restricted to reserves but should be confined to ZOO's. In yet another, proud18 states [t]hese savages don't learn anything, unless its being a savage beast that should not be put among civilized people.
[60] Similarly, proud18's postings about Black people assert that they [Blacks] should still be in the jungle and not among civilized people.
[61] Such messages convey the idea that Black and Aboriginal people are so loathsome that White Canadians cannot and should not associate with them. Such messages provide fertile ground for the growth of hatred and contempt.
(h) The targeted group is de-humanized through comparisons to and associations with animals, vermin, excrement, and other noxious substances.
[62] In Warman v.Winnicki, supra, Black people were described as sub-human beings devoid of any intelligence. They were also called cockroaches and stupid nigger-apes. The Tribunal held that these kinds of descriptions are de-humanizing, degrading and highly likely to expose Black people and other non-White or non-Caucasian people to hatred and contempt (Warman v.Winnicki, supra, at para. 80).
[63] Similarly, in Warman v. Kyburz, supra, at para. 49, the Tribunal stated that the use of terms such as sub-human and vermin to describe Jewish people could most certainly lead some readers to view Jews as being inferior beings, causing them to hold Jewish people in contempt.
Does the material in the present case bear the sub-human hallmark?
[64] Proud18's messages about Aboriginal Canadians characterize them as primitive savages, subhumans, who don't even have one I.Q. point between the whole lot of them and who are of more value as fertilizer than as living human beings. Non-white immigrants are described as non-white scum that crawl here from all the garbage infested countrys (sic) and non-white people in general are described as mud. Jewish people are called stinking jews and Roma are called a filthy group of Hindus called Gypsies who sullied the streets of Europe and are now doing the same in Canada.
[65] WhiteEuroCanadian states that homosexual people are not human beings, they are sexual perverts.
[66] Such descriptions may lead readers to associate members of the targeted groups with waste, sub-human life forms and depravity. By denying the humanity of the targeted group members, they create the conditions for contempt to flourish.
(i) Highly inflammatory and derogatory language is used in the messages to create a tone of extreme hatred and contempt
[67] The use of epithets such as nig or nigger, mud, hebe, paki and others has been found to contribute to the likelihood that a message will expose the targeted groups to hatred or contempt (Warman v. Winnicki, supra, at para. 80). In Warman v. Kulbashian, supra, at paras. 44 - 45, the Tribunal found that the use of the term nigger, with its inherent connotation of slavery, segregation and racism, in and of itself displayed hatred and contempt toward Black people.
[68] The messages in Warman v. Winnicki, supra, were riddled with profanity and a hysterical tone of rage. For example, in one message the respondent wrote the following:
NIGGERS AND EAST INDIANS ARE SHIT!!!! GET OUT OF OUR CIVILIZATION YOU FUCKING MUDS!!!!
[69] The level of vitriol, vulgarity and incendiary language contributed to the Tribunal's finding that the messages in that case were likely to expose members of the targeted groups to hatred or contempt.
Does the language that is used in the present material create a tone of extreme hatred or contempt?
[70] Proud18's postings are riddled with epithets such as nig-nog, nig, paki, injun, and savages. In one message, proud18 states that he called some Aboriginal people injuns in a restaurant and was told by them that this was offensive. Proud18's response was allegedly that as long as Ottawa was giving White Canadians' money to Aboriginal people, proud18 would continue to call them injuns.
[71] The tone created by such language and messages is one of profound disdain and disregard for the self-worth of the members of the targeted groups. The term savages harks back to the colonial days of North America when Aboriginal people were viewed by most Europeans as primitive human beings at best. The use of this deeply insulting term in full knowledge of the offense that it gives demonstrates the extent of proud18's desire to expose Aboriginal people to hatred or contempt.
(j) The messages trivialize or celebrate past persecution or tragedy involving members of the targeted group
[72] In Warman v. Kulbashian, supra, the Respondents made riddles and jokes about the Holocaust. The Tribunal found these riddles and jokes made cruel light of the genocide of Jews in Nazi concentration camps. The effect was to dehumanize members of the targeted group and to set a tone of denigration that would allow hatred and contempt to flourish.
Does the material in the present case bear the hallmark of trivializing or celebrating past tragedy?
[73] Proud18 denies or trivializes the tragedy of the Holocaust by calling it a hoax, a lie perpetrated by Jewish people to extort money from non-Jewish people. Proud18's postings about Asian people celebrate the death and serious injury that allegedly occurred during a gang fight involving people of the Hindu faith. The posting dated January 4, 2004, entitled 2 dead, 4 injured. Yipee, describes the deaths and injuries of people of the Hindu faith as a joyful result. In another posting, proud18 comments on a report in the media that a person of the Hindu faith allegedly transmitted HIV/AIDS to three women. Proud18's response to this news was: Serves the women right, screwing a hindu. Hope they get it and fast.
[74] With respect to Aboriginal Canadians, proud18 writes: Personally I'm getting a bit tired every time I read about a injun tribe beating a white kid to death because they lost their land to our forefathers.
[75] The trivialization and celebration of past tragedy in proud18's postings creates a climate of derision and contempt which makes it likely that members of the targeted groups will be exposed to these emotions.
(k) Calls to take violent action against the targeted group
[76] In Taylor , supra, at page 38, the Tribunal noted that the impugned messages contained aggressive overtones that escalated in their call for violence against members of Canadian minority groups. These calls for violence were premised on the previous messages that attempted to convince the recipients that White Canadians were under attack by these groups and had to fight back or risk becoming victims of racial genocide.
[77] In Warman v. Winnicki, supra, at para. 101, the Tribunal held that calls for violent action against the targeted groups were not only likely to expose members of the groups to hatred and contempt, but worse, they sought to justify, motivate and legitimize violent action against members of the targeted groups.
Do the messages in the present case bear the call for action hallmark of hate messages?
[78] The messages communicated by proud18 ask readers on stormfront.org to communicate their negative experiences with Aboriginal people. The goal is to persuade readers not to harbour any sympathy for these red devils and to take action. Although proud18 does not specify what is meant by taking action, the following posting suggests that it might not be peaceful:
The violence by these scum injuns on innocent white people is getting out of control. We must do something soon to prevent further attacks on our race.
[79] The call for violent action is