Rathgeber's questions, and a final round

Rathgeber asks Burny a pretty good question: how does section 13, a censorship provision that applies to the Internet, stop vandalism of a graveyard?

It's a tough question, so naturally Freiman jumps in and takes it from Burny.

He doesn't answer it, of course. Freiman says that section 13 is "extraordinarly helpful" in fighting "hate".

Does he even believe what he's saying?

Rathgeber replies: we have section 13 -- but it didn't stop this, did it?

Burny can't stay still. He interrupts his interruptor with a ramble about using section 13 to educate young people.

They've been going for nearly two hours on this; there wasn't much light being shone on things by Lynch at the beginning; having Freiman and Farber mumble and push the Holocaust panic button when they get into a pickle, has moved from embarrassing to boring.

Rathgeber does everyone a favour and puts a question to Moon.

Chairman Ed Fast extends the meeting by a few minutes, and gives everyone a final quick question:

Jennings ends with a statement, natch. She says that, contrary to what Rathgeber says, "demonization" is in fact very objective. Tell that to the folks who tried to have this case heard.

Comartin asks about the qualifications of Tribunal members. Freiman says it's a good idea -- as if "more qualified" censors would be better censors.

Russ Hiebert asks Moon a question, referring to Alan Borovoy's concerns about the violation of civil liberties and due process. Moon says that it "would make sense" to fund defendants, too. Moon also says the language of the law appears vague. He emphasizes the burden placed upon any defendants -- not just those who go the distance to a hearing, but anyone who is unlucky enough to even be investigated.