[Images
added by this website]
When
the censors start churning out the hate speech
themselves -- that makes them as much a farce as
a menace 
Toronto,
Canada. Monday, February 18, 2008
Jonathan Kay
on Richard Warman and Canada's phony-racism
industry
CANADIANS now know the
precise moment when radical anti-racism became a
more powerful sociological toxin than racism
itself: 7:55pm EST on Sept. 5, 2003.
That is the date-stamp on a particularly vile
posting, left by an anonymous user on the
message board of the right-wing web site
freedomsite.org,
attacking Canada's first black senator. It read
as follows: 
"Not only is Canadian Senator
Anne Cools is a Negro,
she is also an immigrant! And she is also one
helluva preachy c*nt. She does NOT belong in
my Canada. My Anglo-Germanic people were here
before there was a Canada and her kind have
jumped in, polluted our race, and forced
their bullshit down our throats. Time to go
back to when the women *** imports knew their
place
And that place was NOT in
public!"
Horrible, shocking stuff. But even more
shocking is the identity of the fellow whose
electronic fingerprints were all over the
message: famed Canadian
human-rights lawyer Richard Warman
(right).
Warman is a legend in anti-racism circles. A
former member of the Canadian Human Rights
Commission, he's launched countless complaints
against right-wing extremists, and won almost
all of them. But during proceedings surrounding
one of Warman's 2003-era complaints against
freedomsite,
the respondents turned the tables. A computer
expert named Bernard Klatt did some
digging under freedomsite's back office, and
determined that the Cools posting had been made
from a computer bearing the IP address
66.185.84.204, the very same address from which
Warman had admitted to visiting freedomsite
using a different alias.
Other technical details -- such as the
operating system and Web browser being used --
also provided an exact match to Warman. Based on
this evidence, Klatt concluded in a recently
publicized affidavit, "Richard Warman was the
poster of the message headed 'Cools don't belong
in our Senate.' "
Does this mean Warman is a closet bigot? I
doubt it. What seems more likely is that --
like other anti-racism
activists -- Warman simply found himself
running out of Aryan Nation types to chase
around the Internet. And so, under this theory,
he decided to just start typing the stuff up on
his own computer -- and then added these
self-authored "racist" postings to his
blunderbuss brief against freedomsite. (As Klatt
notes, Warman has been accused of perpetrating
the same sort of stunts on other right-wing Web
sites.) When you've got profitable hate-speech
cases to prosecute, why wait for some unemployed
conspiracy theorist to start raving against
immigrants when you can just manufacture the
evidence yourself?
Bizarre as this episode may be, it is of a
piece with a larger trend -- symbolized, south
of the border, by the shamefully trumped up case
against the Duke University lacrosse team. The
anti-racism industry, running out of legitimate
hatemongers to go after, has gone rogue in its
search for attention and relevance.
It also raises the question: How many other
faux-racist frauds are out there? Thanks to
Warman, it's a question I now think about every
time a Canadian hate-speech activist or blogger
publicizes an email he gets from some
whitepower22@hotmail.com or other. These
poisonous messages are held up as dramatic proof
that there are still plenty of Nazi types out
there -- and that without hate-speech laws to
shut them up, the country's gays, Jews, Black
and Arabs will remain at risk of verbal assault,
or worse. But if the picking are so slim that
anti-racists have slid into second careers as
fiction writers, what does that say about the
scale of the problem? How many of the other
examples of "hate" that you see out there are
similarly bogus?
The
anti-racism industry has become an industry like
any other: As the actual need for what it's
peddling has diminished in this extraordinarily
tolerant nation, the industry's various
profiteers and carnival barkers have created
myths and exaggerated fears to prop themselves
up.
As I've written before, this would not be so
much a problem if their various speech codes
were used merely to prosecute men such as
David Ahenakew, Ernst Zündel, Jim
Keegstra and the like. But in the post-9/11
era, radical anti-racists are also agitating to
shut up sensible people saying sensible things
about the war against militant Islam, the
defining global struggle of our era. They're
also giving comfort to Islamists who seek to
carve out sectarian taboos from our hallowed
tradition of free speech.
All of this would be destructive enough on
its own. When the censors start churning out the
hate speech themselves -- that makes them as
much a farce as a menace.