SHARIA RULING CANADA: Blogger convicted of defamation (Islamic blasphemy) in Quebec, ordered to pay $60K

Another crushing blow to freedom of speech in a previously free country mow undergoing the crippling effects of islamization.

Without sites such as (Geller Report and this persecuted blogger), freedom loving people would not understand this ruling let alone how dangerous and destructive Islamic law can be to a free society. This is why we are targeted so mercilessly and relentlessly.

A Canadian court has convicted a blogger of ‘defamation’ of a veiled sharia activist in what can only be described as a political prosecution and further proof of the erosion of our individual rights and freedom under islamization.  I can assure you, my colleagues and I would never win such a case if we sued – and our treatment in the “legitimate” media has been far, far worse.

paragraphs 237 and 239 of the decision imply that news should not be examined on their own merits but rather according to the nature of their sources (mainstream media vs individual websites).

The implications of this ruling is far reaching. The idea is citizens cannot report news,  only”professional journalists”should be allowed to – a frightening and egregious attack on our speech freedoms. Professional journalists have done more to undermine our constitutional republic than any foreign actors. If given the choice, my money is on the “citizen journalist” not paid hacks working in service to George Soros or some Saudi pimp.

It’s one of those terrible court decisions that evokes Dred Scot, the legal sanction of oppression and slavery. The decentralization of the news is a long time coming. News, opinions has always been a cacophony of voices, that is up until the mid 20th century.

In the 18th century, pamphleteers were much like today’s bloggers. The “the most brilliant economic journalist who ever lived” Frédéric Bastiat is known primarily for his work as a pamphleteer.

Pamphlets were used to broadcast the writer’s opinions: to articulate a political ideology, for example, or to encourage people to vote for a particular politician.
Thomas Paine’s pamphlets were influential in the history of the American Revolutionary War.17th-century Dutch naval officer Witte Corneliszoon de With wrote papers mocking and praising his fellow officers. Poet and polemicist John Milton published pamphlets as well.

Before the consolidation of the news organizations in the 20th century, there were thousands of newspapers and penny press – 1,200 by 1835 alone. And that was before the Civil War. “These organs connected far-flung communities, enabled the development of national political parties, and promoted the country’s continental expansion and economic growth. ” Large newspapers of the day were the exception rather than the norm. By 1860, over 80% of the nation’s newspapers were small-circulation partisan journals (more here).

During the period 1725-1800, there were more than 137 newspaper titles in New York alone,  20 of these in New York City. By 1865, according to the U.S. census, 373 newspapers were being published in 428 editions in New York, 54 of these in New York City.

This was a good thing -debate, discourse, human thought.  This crackpot idea of fake news, hate speech, etc is a canard wielded by the left to  silence those of us who dissent.

Philippe Magnan is the founder of the site postedeveille.ca , a site of  news and opinion denouncing the Islamization of Quebec society and complacency of political elites in this phenomenon. The political prosecution under the sharia of Philippe Magnan, the anti-jihad blogger who operates the website Poste de veille, will be appealed. But make no mistake, this will have an absolutely chilling effect on all Canadian bloggers nee pamphleteers who fear similar persecution.

In this lawsuit, what Magnan was criticized for was damaging the reputation of Awada, the leading figure of Islam in Quebec and proud defender of the wearing of the veil, by linking it in various articles, videos and messages published on Facebook, to radical Islamism through its relationships and some events in which it took part.

These facts are not denied, Awada did participate in the events mentioned and has many connections with the targeted people, but Magnan has no evidence other than “by association” to reach his conclusions. When the process of “guilt by association” is applied to nationalist dissidents, the technique is legitimate, but, it is well understood, it is only legitimate when it is aimed at “the extreme right”.

Initially Awada’s complaint also targeted secularist Louise Mailloux and the Society of Friends of Vigile, the organization behind the sovereignist site Vigile.net . Louise Mailloux reacted by filing a complaint against Awada, which ended in an out-of-court settlement where both parties abandoned their complaint. The Society of Friends of Vigile had managed to bring down the lawsuit against her, the lawyer Marie-France Goldwater, who then represented Awada, having made several mistakes like that of publicly declaring that she was happy to to take to independence. The political aspect of the complaint was thus confirmed.

The judgment of Judge Carole Julien, who surprisingly in the preamble of his verdict was anxious to emphasize the beauty of Awada, may have a deterrent effect. If one can not criticize a public figure and the links that it maintains, what about freedom of expression? (Read the rest – translation here)

The truth and accuracy of Mr. Magnan‘s allegations played no part in the stunning verdict. That is Sharia.

Anti-Islamist blogger convicted for defamation in Quebec ($60k)

GR Canadian reader Gisele

In Quebec, Philippe Magnan, an anti-Islamist blogger who operates the website Poste de veille was recently found guilty of defamation against Dalila Awada and convicted to pay $60,000. Magnan has announced his intention to appeal the decision. The Journal de Montréal reported the decision and the judgement in available on CanLii.

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2018/07/13/condamne-pour-diffamation-le-blogueur-magnan-doit-verser-60-000–a-la-militante-dalila-awada

https://www.canlii.org/fr/qc/qccs/doc/2018/2018qccs3023/2018qccs3023.html

ALSO: http://archive.is/1xKAZ

Without getting into the specifics of the case, paragraphs 237 and 239 of the decision imply that news should not be examined on their own merits but rather according to the nature of their sources (mainstream media vs individual websites).

I do not have to remind you, that, throughout history, every innovation, every discovery has been the product of the efforts of individuals before being endorsed by organizations.

[My translation] [237] It is desirable for a society that information flows as freely as possible. However, no proof of expertise has been offered during this trial regarding the existence of mechanisms guaranteeing a real and genuine information on the web when it is published by “citizens.” The Tribunal concludes that, to this day, these mechanisms are only in operation in the field of professional journalism. […]

[239] One thing is certain. Our democracies are based, among other things, on a free press with high standards of quality. [Web]sites that spring up away from these mechanisms of control risk of spreading fake news and baseless and unverified theories. The dissemination of fake news constitutes a danger as great as the silencing of the press for our democracies. Case in point: the file under study in this trial.
> [237] Il est souhaitable pour une société que l’information circule le plus librement possible.  Toutefois, aucune preuve d’expertise n’a été offerte pendant ce procès concernant l’existence de mécanismes garantissant sur le web une information réelle et valable lorsqu’elle émane de « citoyens ».  Le Tribunal conclut que ces mécanismes restent encore dans le créneau du journalisme professionnel. […]

[239] Une chose est certaine.  Nos démocraties sont fondées sur, notamment, une presse libre et de qualité.  Les sites qui pullulent en marge des mécanismes de contrôle de cette qualité risquent de répandre de fausses nouvelles, des théories sans fondements et non vérifiées.  La diffusion de fausses informations est un danger aussi grand que le musèlement de la presse pour nos démocraties.  Un bon exemple de ce préjudice réside dans la trame factuelle du présent dossier.