Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Pligganease]

Pride leader faces charges


Melissa Guille, one of few female white supremacy organizers, is facing human rights charges.

By RANDY RICHMOND, FREE PRESS REPORTER



One of the few female organizers in Canada's white pride movement, and a potential national leader, is to appear today on charges she violated Canada's Human Rights Act.

Melissa Guille and her Southwestern Ontario-based Canadian Heritage Alliance have been brought before a Canadian human rights tribunal in Toronto on charges their Internet site promoted hatred.

Getting a decision against her would be a coup for anti-racism activists.

Guille is considered a bright light in the white supremacy movement, whose focus on "European heritage" has successfully sidestepped anti-hate laws.

Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman brought the complaint against Guille after studying the Canadian Heritage Alliance's website.

"You just had to scratch a millimetre beneath the surface," he said yesterday.

Guille's website includes material that encourages vicious attacks on the Arab, Jewish and black communities, Warman said.

Warman's complaint alleges other website postings argue the Holocaust didn't occur, that most whites who have relationships with black men get AIDS and deserve to die, that Jews kidnap Russian children to sexually torture them for pornographic films and that Muslims in England engage in cannibalism.

The Canadian Human Rights Act bans online messages that are likely to expose people to hatred or contempt based on their colour, ethnic origin, religion or sexual orientation.

Violations of the rights law are punishable by fines.

Born in 1972, Guille graduated in history from Wilfrid Laurier University in Kitchener.

After she was exposed by Kitchener media as head of the Canadian Heritage Alliance, she moved to London in 2002.

She has apparently moved back to the Cambridge area.

"She is one of the few women who have taken a leadership role in Canada," Warman said.

Her Canadian Heritage Alliance's website went online in November 2000 and by the end of the first month had 35 subscribers and 10 paying members, according to Matt Lauder, an anti-hate activist who posed as a white supremacist and infiltrated the alliance.

Guille has, at various times, dated other white supremacist leaders.

She has declined to speak to The Free Press, but she defended herself on her website.

"The complaint against the CHA and Ms. Guille did not originate as a result of a criminal investigation, nor did it originate from a protected group that feels they have been discriminated against or exposed to contempt by viewpoints expressed on the website," the notice reads.

"The complaint came from a man, Mr. Warman, who had spent years scouring the website and waiting until he had enough to file a complaint against CHA and Ms. Guille in an attempt to oppress opinions that are in conflict to his own."

_____________________________________

What happened to freedom of speech? Whatever happened to "I might not agree with you, but I'll die to defend your right to say it?" I guess that only applies in ON if I agree with you?

This womans opinion is appalling, but she has every right to say it.

[Octavius Hite]

Good send her to jail along with any muslim screaming about women or jews attacking palestianians. Freedom of speech comes with responsibility.

[Pligganease]

[Satori]

Your thread title is wrong. It's all there in the article.

[cbclark4]

[Pligganease]

[cbclark4]

If it's your ball in play why not play the ball.

Free speech is simply free speech.

There is no license in free speech to say anything you want.

For instance fraudulant speech isn't tolerated.

Speech meant to falsely incite, shouting fire in a theater when there is no fire is the classic example.

There is big difference between social and political debate and hate mongering.

cbc

[Pligganease]

[Satori]

[cbclark4]

A link to the website under question.

http://www.canadianheritagealliance.com/portal/

I haven't read it yet. I will be back with opinion.

cbc

[cbclark4]

A quick look didn't show anything offensive.

Certainly if anyone finds something of substance there, please post a link.

Rather benign compared to others I've seen.

cbc

[Satori]

I had a look through several articles. It's clearly a white supremist page, but it's very cleverly done so as to appear not outrageous. They chose articles that are carefully written, but the message is clear.

[Adventurer]

This highlights a difference between Canada and the U.S. They are also being taken to court over the postings of some members. Can you really control the postings of your members unless you tightly monitor their postings? They highly value their European heritage and think their heritage is better. Many groups feel that way. Just a thought, though I don't agree with their modus operandi or agenda. This is for exchanging perspectives.

[ajgeddes]

Sounds to me like they are doing the right thing. She is promoting hate.

[Milwaukiedave]

I don't know if you guys remember, but there was a similar case in the US where someone was found responsible for hate speech put on a website toward abortion doctors. Essentially the site was a "hit list" that encouraged people to kill abortion doctors. There was a judgement made against him, but I believe it was overturned on appeal.

Edit: While I don't want to throw the thread off-topic, I think some of these websites are interesting to look at in terms of the debate that is going on in this case. Granted US and Canadian laws differ, but I'm sure the outcome will be closely watched by both countries.

Here is someone's personal synopsis of the debate:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~oracle/nuremberg/gate.html

Note: There is a link to a mirror site so that you can look at what it used be on it, however because that site is pretty disgusting I'm not going to post the link.

Ohio State Law Review

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/lawjournal/issues/volume61/number3/vitiello.pdf