It takes a bit of believing, but the New
Brunswick Appeal Court has overturned
the libel judgment against a Jewish
cartoonist Josh Beutel who depicted Malcolm Ross as
a Nazi.
- Malcolm Ross
speaking in Toronto
Mr. Ross is the author and former
teacher who has been hounded for years
by Organized Jewry.
It began when a human rights inquiry
decided on a Jewish complaint that books
he had written had created "a
poisoned atmosphere" for Jewish
students. His removal from his position
was ordered in spite of his never having
mentioned the Jews in class. Nor had his
books ever been read by them.
Ross challenged that order in court,
and it was vetoed, the judge holding
that his freedom of expression and
freedom of religion were being
infringed.
He is an ardent Christian who
believes the Jews are the enemies of
Christianity which, in view of the
attacks on Christian prayers in schools
and city councils, and demands that they
be dropped in legislatures, is not
entirely unreasonable.
The court verdict didn't suit the
Canadian Jewish Congress and B'nai
B'rith, which fought the matter to the
Supreme Court of Canada. Whereupon the
Supremos ordered that Ross could not
teach class but could hold a
non-teaching position.
The media demonized him and the
school board fired him. No reasons were
given, nor was he granted a severance
package. Just a pink slip. Homosexuals
and freaks of many kinds can be
teachers, but not a guy who annoys the
powerful. Meanwhile, the politically
correct New Brunswick Teachers
Association lifted not a finger in his
defence. They were on the other side.
In 1993, in fact, the teachers held a
day-long seminar at a local synagogue
during which Beutel showed crude,
anti-Ross cartoons. One had him with a
pencil up his backside, over the
caption, "Free at last, to write
for The Klansman, The Aryan Newsletter,
The Order." Another showed Hitler
on one side and Ross on the other, with
the question, "What is the
difference between Joseph Goebbels and
Malcolm Ross? This one wrote in German,
this one in English."
- Beutel shows disgusting
cartoons of Ross
Ross sued for libel, with B.C. lawyer
Doug Christie representing him, and was
awarded $7,500, plus costs, the Court of
Queen's Bench judge stating:
|
"Beutel
comments upon and criticizes Ross as a
person who is a Nazi and should be
characterized as such. He comments on
the fact that Mr. Ross's views are
substantially the same as those held by
Hitler, Gobbels (sic) and other leaders
of Nazi Germany.
- One of Beutel
cartoons about Ross
"On my assessment of the
testimony and material presented at
trial, evidence does not support that as
a true fact.
"Ross strongly denies that he is
a Nazi [and] points to the Nazi
philosophy as being anti-religious and
as such the antithesis to his
position."
The decision vexed the Jewish side
mightily. Up popped the CJC's Bernie
Farber with a comment that should win a
prize for hypocrisy, considering that no
group in the country has been more
opposed to free speech than his lot,
both in human rights tribunals and in
the courts. One might have thought that
the Jews had had nothing to do with the
original human rights complaint against
Ross in the book issue.
"The judge's decision was a very
dangerous breach of the right to free
speech," declared Farber
unctuously.
Can we assume that the CJC and B'nai
B'rith leopards have changed their
spots? Were their complaints at my two
rights tribunals all a mistake? If I get
to court to challenge B.C.'s Human
Rights Code will they be on my side?
I'm not holding my breath. But with a
Jewish cartoonist on the griddle the CJC
and B'Nai B'rith became suddenly
converted to freedom of expression.They
intervened on Beutel's behalf in his
appeal against the libel verdict and, as
stated, got it overturned.
Ross now asks what would have
happened if a Christian had drawn
cartoons of equivalent nastiness against
a Jew, and mocked the Jewish religion in
the way Beutel mocked his.
The mind boggles, too, at the Appeal
Court's view that the Beutel cartoons
were without malice.
According to the Oxford Encyclopedic
Dictionary, one of the meanings of
malice is to tease, especially cruelly.
But perhaps its editors don't really
know the meaning of words. Or could it
be that the New Brunswick Appeal Court
doesn't have a dictionary?
To call a man a Nazi means that he
supports government-by-thuggery. As the
initial verdict made clear, nothing in
his history shows that Ross does that.
Is it libellous to call a man a Nazi
who is not a Nazi? Apparently not.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
Christianity on Trial
$25.00 CAN per copy ($15 US)
[Order
online now!] |
