Cover

Title:
The Doxxing of Thule Society
Moncton, Managed by Andrew Christo
Nelson: Exposing Canada’s Neo-Nazi
Problem and the Total Institutional
Failure of the RCMP, CHRC, CRCC,
and PMO in the Post-Harper Era,
Proposed Laws and Mitigation
Strategies
By:
Marie Seshat Landry
CEO, OSINT Spymaster
www.marielandryceo.com
(Marie Landry's Spy Shop and Spymaster Enterprises)

Abstract:

This paper provides a detailed investigation into the rise of neo-Nazism in Canada,
focusing on the case of Andrew Christo Nelson and the Thule Society Moncton. It
exposes the systemic failures of key Canadian institutions, including the RCMP,
Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC), Civilian Review and Complaints
Commission (CRCC), and the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), which have allowed
far-right extremism to flourish unchecked in the wake of Stephen Harper’s repeal of
Section 13. The doxxing of Nelson by Marie Seshat Landry serves as a turning
point in this case, revealing not just an individual but a broader network of hate
speech, propaganda, and violent threats against marginalized communities. The
paper argues that Section 13’s repeal left a legal vacuum that extremists have
exploited, but also outlines other legal avenues, such as Section 319 of the
Criminal Code, which authorities can and should still use to prosecute Nelson and
his group. It concludes by offering a set of legislative reforms, enforcement
mechanisms, and checks on hate speech while preserving the balance between
free speech and public safety.

Table of Contents:

1. Introduction
○ Background and Context
○ Importance of Addressing Neo-Nazism in Canada
○ Scope of the Paper
2. Historical Context: Canada’s Struggle with Neo-Nazism
○ Overview of Canadian White Supremacist Movements
○ Global Influence on Canadian Far-Right Extremism
3. The Repeal of Section 13 and Its Consequences
○ Stephen Harper’s 2013 Repeal: Impact on Hate Speech Laws
○ How Section 13’s Removal Created a Legal Vacuum
4. Case Study: Andrew Christo Nelson and Thule Society Moncton
○ Nelson’s Role in Leading the Thule Society Moncton
○ Propaganda and Recruitment Efforts
○ The Doxxing Event: Ethical Implications and Exposing Extremism
5. Institutional Failures in Addressing Neo-Nazism
○ RCMP’s Inaction Despite Clear Evidence
○ The Weakened Role of the CHRC After Section 13’s Repeal
○ Oversight Failures of the CRCC
○ Political Indifference from the PMO and Broader Government
6. Consequences of Failing to Act
○ Spread of Neo-Nazi Ideologies and Hate Groups
○ Threats to Marginalized Communities
○ Damage to Canada’s Global Reputation as a Defender of Human
Rights
7. Legal Avenues to Prosecute Andrew Christo Nelson Despite Section
13’s Repeal
○ Section 319 of the Criminal Code: Hate Propaganda
○ Section 264.1: Uttering Threats
○ Section 83.19: Terrorist Activities
○ Section 22: Counseling to Commit an Offense
○ Section 423: Intimidation
○ Section 372: Harassing Communications
8. Proposed Legislative Solutions and Mitigation Strategies
○ Reinstating Section 13 or Introducing a Modernized Hate Speech Law
 ○ Establishing a National Hate Crimes Task Force
○ Holding Digital Platforms Accountable for Hate Speech
○ Creating Checks and Balances for Free Speech Protections
9. Conclusion: A Call to Action
○ Summary of Institutional Failures
○ Urgency of Legal Reforms
○ Final Appeal to Canadian Lawmakers

I. Introduction

Background and Context

The rise of neo-Nazism and far-right extremism in Canada poses a significant

threat to both national security and the social fabric of the country. While Canada is
often viewed as a bastion of multiculturalism, tolerance, and democracy, the reality is
that these values are increasingly being tested by the growing influence of hate
groups operating both online and in physical communities. In recent years, hate
groups such as Blood & Honour, the Heritage Front, and other white supremacist
movements have gained traction. One of the most alarming examples of this trend is
the Thule Society Moncton, led by Andrew Christo Nelson, whose neo-Nazi
activities have gone largely unchecked by Canadian authorities.

Andrew Christo Nelson is emblematic of a broader issue: the failure of key

Canadian institutions—law enforcement, human rights bodies, and
governmental oversight agencies—to effectively address the rise of extremist
ideologies, particularly in the digital space. This failure can be directly linked to the
repeal of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act in 2013, which removed
the legal framework that once allowed authorities to prosecute online hate speech.
Since then, far-right groups like Nelson’s have been able to spread their ideology
with impunity, leading to increased recruitment efforts, hate propaganda, and calls for
violence against marginalized communities.

Importance of Addressing Neo-Nazism in Canada

Canada’s failure to confront far-right extremism head-on is not just a national issue; it
also affects the country’s international reputation as a global leader in human rights.
Neo-Nazi ideologies, left unchecked, have the potential to cause widespread harm,
both in terms of physical violence and societal division. The existence of these
groups endangers Canada’s commitment to diversity, inclusivity, and equal
protection under the law.
Far-right extremism targets vulnerable groups, including LGBTQ+ individuals,
racial minorities, immigrants, and those who advocate for liberal democratic
values. The Thule Society Moncton, in particular, has been implicated in hate
speech, calls for violence, and promoting Nazi symbols—activities that are not only
morally reprehensible but also criminal under Canadian law.

Scope of the Paper

This paper seeks to:

● Analyze the rise of neo-Nazism in Canada with a specific focus on Andrew

Christo Nelson and his group, the Thule Society Moncton.
● Examine the institutional failures of the RCMP, CHRC, CRCC, and PMO in
addressing this threat.
● Provide a legal analysis of the various tools still available under Canadian
law that could be used to prosecute Nelson, even after the repeal of Section
13.
● Propose legislative reforms that would strengthen Canada’s ability to
combat hate speech and far-right extremism while maintaining a balance with
free speech protections.
● Offer actionable recommendations for law enforcement and policymakers
to ensure that hate groups and violent extremists are held accountable and
that marginalized communities are protected.

Through the examination of Nelson’s doxxing and the failure of authorities to act
decisively, this paper will demonstrate the urgent need for new laws, better
enforcement, and a national commitment to combating extremism.

II. Historical Context: Canada’s Struggle with Neo-Nazism

1. Canada’s White Supremacist and Far-Right Movements

Although Canada is internationally recognized for its commitment to

multiculturalism and tolerance, the country has long been home to pockets of
white supremacist and far-right extremism. These movements, while smaller in
comparison to those in countries like the United States, have left a significant mark
on Canada’s social and political landscape. Among the most notable far-right groups
are the Heritage Front and Blood & Honour, which gained notoriety in the late 20th
and early 21st centuries for promoting hate, racism, and violence.

● Heritage Front: Established in 1989, the Heritage Front was one of

Canada’s most infamous white supremacist organizations. Led by Wolfgang
Droege, the group openly promoted racism, anti-Semitism, and violence
 against minorities. It gained prominence through its involvement in protests,
violent incidents, and hate propaganda campaigns before being officially
dissolved in 2005. However, the ideas it propagated have continued to
influence modern far-right movements.
● Blood & Honour: An international white supremacist network, Blood &
Honour has maintained a significant presence in Canada. This group has
been linked to violent actions, including hate crimes and neo-Nazi
propaganda, targeting marginalized communities. Their influence on
Canada’s extremist scene continues today, with cells still active in various
regions of the country.

These groups, and others like them, have taken advantage of periods of political
tension and economic uncertainty to spread their ideologies, recruiting from
disenfranchised individuals and people drawn to extremist rhetoric.

2. The Global Influence on Canada’s Far-Right Extremism

The rise of global far-right extremism has played a crucial role in shaping the
neo-Nazi and white supremacist movements in Canada. In the age of the internet
and social media, Canadian extremists have drawn inspiration and resources from
similar movements in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere.

Key influences include:

● The American Far-Right: Events like the 2017 Charlottesville rally in the
U.S. and the January 6th Capitol riot have emboldened Canadian far-right
extremists, leading to an increase in hate speech and far-right organizing.
Online forums and social media platforms have allowed for cross-border
collaboration, enabling Canadian extremists to participate in global far-right
discussions and organize alongside their American counterparts.
● European Neo-Nazism: The resurgence of far-right nationalism in Europe
has similarly had an impact on Canada’s extremist groups. The Thule
Society, for instance, has its roots in the occult and racial theories of Nazi
Germany. Modern incarnations of these ideas have found their way into
Canadian circles, with Andrew Christo Nelson’s Thule Society Moncton
being a direct reflection of this influence. His promotion of Nazi symbols and
rhetoric mirrors the tactics of European far-right groups that use historical
fascist ideologies as a foundation for modern hate campaigns.

In the digital era, far-right movements in Canada are no longer isolated or

homegrown; they are part of a global network of extremism. This global network has
enabled individuals like Nelson to build their organizations, recruit followers, and
evade detection, often relying on dark web platforms and encrypted messaging
apps to communicate with like-minded extremists.
3. The Dangers of Political and Legal Inaction

Canada’s political and legal response to neo-Nazi and far-right extremism has often
been slow and ineffective. While law enforcement and government agencies have
taken some steps to address far-right groups, the repeal of Section 13 in 2013 left a
major gap in the country’s ability to combat hate speech, particularly online.

Section 13 was a key provision in the Canadian Human Rights Act that allowed
individuals to file complaints about hate speech communicated via
telecommunication networks, including the internet. Its repeal by the Stephen
Harper government was framed as a victory for free speech, but the reality is that it
created a legal vacuum in which hate groups like the Thule Society Moncton could
operate with relative impunity.

The RCMP’s failure to take action on far-right extremism, even when presented with
clear evidence, has compounded the problem. This inaction has allowed hate groups
to flourish, spreading propaganda, inciting violence, and targeting vulnerable
communities without fear of prosecution.

This historical context highlights the roots of Canada’s struggle with neo-Nazism
and far-right extremism. It demonstrates that these movements are not new, nor
are they isolated; rather, they are part of a larger global network of hate that has
been allowed to fester due to legal gaps and institutional inaction.

III. The Repeal of Section 13 and Its Consequences

1. Stephen Harper’s 2013 Repeal of Section 13

In 2013, under the leadership of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the Canadian
government repealed Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. This
provision had long been a contentious point in Canadian law, as it allowed the
Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) to investigate and address
complaints of hate speech communicated via telecommunication networks, which
included the internet.

Section 13 was instrumental in dealing with online hate speech, providing a civil
framework for complaints and remedies where criminal action might have been too
extreme or difficult to prove. The CHRC could investigate instances of hate
propaganda, and if a case was found, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal could
impose penalties, including fines and cease-and-desist orders. The section allowed
for preventive action, dealing with hate speech before it escalated into violence or
criminal behavior.

However, opponents of Section 13, particularly free speech advocates, argued that
it was an overreach, potentially infringing upon freedom of expression as protected
by Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The
Conservative government under Harper sided with these arguments, framing the
repeal as a victory for free speech and the protection of civil liberties.

2. The Legal Vacuum Created by Section 13’s Removal

The repeal of Section 13 left a significant gap in Canada's legal framework for
addressing hate speech, especially online. While proponents of the repeal argued
that Criminal Code provisions, such as Section 319 (which addresses hate
propaganda and public incitement of hatred), would be sufficient to handle
serious cases of hate speech, the reality is that criminal prosecution requires a
much higher standard of evidence and burden of proof.

● Criminal Law vs. Civil Enforcement: The criminal provisions, such as

Section 319, demand clear evidence of intent to incite violence or hatred
against an identifiable group. This is a much higher bar to meet compared to
the civil standard of Section 13, which allowed for a more preventive
approach. The result has been that many instances of online hate speech
go unaddressed, as criminal prosecution is either not feasible or not pursued
due to resource constraints in law enforcement.
● The Rise of Online Hate: In the years since the repeal of Section 13, Canada
has witnessed an increase in online hate speech, including the rise of
far-right extremist groups like Thule Society Moncton. These groups,
emboldened by the absence of legal consequences, have taken to social
media, encrypted apps, and dark web platforms to spread their ideologies and
recruit new members. The legal vacuum has allowed individuals like
Andrew Christo Nelson to operate with impunity, promoting Nazi ideology,
glorifying violence, and threatening public figures and marginalized
communities.
● Failure to Adapt to the Digital Age: The removal of Section 13 also reflects
a broader failure of Canadian law to keep up with the digitalization of hate.
While traditional hate speech laws were designed for speech in public forums,
online platforms provide a new and far-reaching mechanism for spreading
hate, recruiting extremists, and organizing violent movements. Without
Section 13 or a similar provision in place, Canada’s legal framework has been
slow to respond to the challenges posed by the internet.

3. How Section 13’s Repeal Enabled Groups Like Thule Society Moncton
The rise of Andrew Christo Nelson and the Thule Society Moncton is a direct
example of how the repeal of Section 13 enabled neo-Nazi and far-right extremist
groups to operate more freely in Canada. Nelson’s activities, which include
promoting Nazi imagery, recruiting individuals through dark web forums, and
making threats against public figures like Justin Trudeau, would have been grounds
for investigation under Section 13. However, without that civil enforcement tool,
these activities have largely gone unpunished.

● Increased Recruitment and Propaganda: Since the repeal, groups like the
Thule Society Moncton have been able to recruit more openly, using online
platforms to spread their ideology. The lack of immediate legal consequences
has emboldened these groups to increase their propaganda efforts, often
targeting young, vulnerable individuals for radicalization.
● Normalization of Hate: The absence of robust hate speech laws has led to
the normalization of hateful rhetoric, especially online. By failing to address
hate speech early on, it has allowed it to grow and become more entrenched
in Canadian society. Andrew Christo Nelson is just one of many who have
exploited this legal gap to promote white supremacy and Nazi ideology
without fear of immediate consequence.
● Institutional Inaction: The RCMP and other Canadian institutions have
repeatedly cited the repeal of Section 13 as one of the reasons for their
inaction in cases like Nelson’s. Without the civil provisions of Section 13, law
enforcement is left relying on the more cumbersome and difficult-to-prosecute
criminal statutes, which often results in delays or failures to act. This
institutional reluctance has left marginalized communities more vulnerable
to hate speech, threats, and violence.

This section highlights the critical role Section 13 played in Canada’s fight against
hate speech and the dangerous consequences of its repeal. The legal vacuum left
by the repeal has allowed extremist groups to flourish, with Canadian institutions
either unwilling or unable to effectively address the growing threat of far-right
extremism.

IV. Case Study: Andrew Christo Nelson and Thule Society Moncton

1. Profile of Andrew Christo Nelson

Andrew Christo Nelson is a Canadian far-right extremist and neo-Nazi who leads the
Thule Society Moncton, a neo-Nazi group with a stronghold in southern New
Brunswick. The Thule Society, historically, is rooted in the Nazi occultist movements
of the early 20th century, and its modern-day iterations are associated with the
promotion of white supremacist ideologies and anti-Semitism. Nelson’s leadership
of this group represents a growing trend of individuals embracing neo-Nazi
ideologies in the post-Harper era, fueled by online platforms and the relative lack
of legal consequences due to the repeal of Section 13.

Nelson is known for:

● Promoting Nazi imagery and symbols such as swastikas.

● Using social media, encrypted messaging apps, and the dark web to recruit
members and spread hate-filled propaganda.
● Making direct threats of violence against marginalized communities, liberal
political figures, and LGBTQ+ activists, including Canadian Prime Minister
Justin Trudeau.

In his communications, Nelson has expressed admiration for nationalist movements

like the Azov Battalion in Ukraine and has suggested that a second insurrection
against liberal governments, particularly in the United States, is inevitable. His
group, the Thule Society Moncton, openly espouses white supremacist,
anti-LGBTQ+, and anti-liberal views, making it one of the most dangerous extremist
groups in the region.

2. Propaganda and Recruitment Efforts

Nelson’s Thule Society Moncton has become a hub for the promotion of neo-Nazi
propaganda and the recruitment of like-minded individuals. This recruitment is
primarily carried out through online platforms, which provide a cloak of anonymity
and allow hate groups to thrive without fear of immediate detection or prosecution.
Nelson uses encrypted communication tools such as Telegram, Discord, and dark
web forums to spread his message, making it difficult for law enforcement to track
his activities.

● Nazi Symbolism: Nelson frequently uses Nazi symbols such as the swastika
in his communications, reinforcing the white supremacist ideals of his group.
These symbols are used to intimidate and recruit new members, often
appealing to younger, disenfranchised individuals who are seeking a sense of
belonging in extremist communities.
● Online Hate Speech: Nelson’s propaganda frequently targets marginalized
groups, particularly LGBTQ+ individuals, immigrants, and liberals. His
language is filled with violent threats, calls for the overthrow of democratic
institutions, and glorification of Nazi leaders such as Adolf Hitler.
● Recruitment Tactics: Nelson’s recruitment methods are designed to exploit
vulnerable individuals, particularly those who feel disenfranchised by
mainstream society. Through the use of hate-filled memes, videos, and
Nazi-inspired propaganda, he is able to create a community that thrives on
racism, homophobia, and anti-Semitism. His use of encrypted platforms
makes it difficult for law enforcement to intervene or disrupt these activities.
3. The Doxxing of Andrew Christo Nelson by Marie Seshat Landry

In 2024, Marie Seshat Landry, a transgender liberal activist and OSINT spymaster,
took the step of doxxing Andrew Christo Nelson, publicly revealing his identity and
his role as the leader of the Thule Society Moncton. The doxxing occurred after
repeated failures by the RCMP and other Canadian authorities to take action against
Nelson, despite clear evidence of his involvement in hate speech, Nazi
propaganda, and threats of violence.

The decision to doxx Nelson was not taken lightly. Landry, having spent months
documenting and analyzing Nelson’s online activities, came to the conclusion that
exposing his identity was the only way to bring attention to the neo-Nazi threat he
posed. By making his identity public, Landry hoped to force the hand of law
enforcement and government agencies to take action where they had previously
failed.

Ethical Implications of Doxxing:

● Doxxing is a controversial tactic, as it involves publicly releasing personal

information, which can be viewed as an invasion of privacy. However, in cases
like Nelson’s, where legal institutions have failed to act, doxxing is sometimes
seen as a last resort to expose dangerous individuals.
● In this case, the moral imperative was to protect vulnerable communities
from extremist threats, particularly when the system designed to do so had
failed. While doxxing is not a universally accepted practice, it can play a role
in bringing attention to individuals who pose serious threats to public safety.

The doxxing of Andrew Christo Nelson revealed the extent of his involvement in
neo-Nazi activities and the danger he posed to Canadian democracy. Landry’s
actions highlighted the failure of Canadian institutions to prevent hate speech and
protect marginalized communities, forcing a public conversation about the
country’s inability to address the growing threat of far-right extremism.

The case study of Andrew Christo Nelson demonstrates the intersection of

neo-Nazi ideology, online recruitment, and institutional failure in Canada. His
use of encrypted platforms and hate propaganda, combined with the inaction of
Canadian authorities, allowed him to build a network of extremists with impunity.
The doxxing of Nelson by Marie Seshat Landry marks a turning point in the
exposure of his activities, but it also underscores the urgent need for legal reforms
and stronger enforcement mechanisms to combat far-right extremism in Canada.

V. Institutional Failures in Addressing Neo-Nazism

1. RCMP’s Inaction Despite Clear Evidence

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Canada’s federal and national law
enforcement agency, has been heavily criticized for its failure to investigate and
prosecute Andrew Christo Nelson and other far-right extremists despite clear
evidence of their illegal activities. The RCMP’s inaction is emblematic of a broader
institutional failure to address the rise of domestic far-right extremism, particularly
in cases involving online hate speech, neo-Nazi propaganda, and threats of
violence.

Key Points of Failure:

● Ignoring Clear Threats: Despite having access to numerous reports,

including social media posts and evidence of Nazi imagery, the RCMP has
largely refused to act against individuals like Nelson. In multiple instances,
documented threats of violence were dismissed or deprioritized.
● Citing Legal Gaps: The RCMP often attributes its inaction to the repeal of
Section 13, arguing that the Criminal Code provisions, such as Section 319
(hate propaganda) and Section 264.1 (uttering threats), are more difficult to
enforce. This rationale, however, ignores the many cases in which Andrew
Christo Nelson’s actions clearly violated existing criminal statutes, even
without Section 13.
● Lack of Specialized Training: The RCMP’s lack of specialized training in
tracking and prosecuting online hate groups is another key factor. The rise
of encrypted communication methods, such as dark web forums and apps
like Telegram, has outpaced law enforcement’s capacity to effectively monitor
and infiltrate these groups.

Consequences of RCMP’s Inaction:

● Emboldening Extremists: By not acting, the RCMP has essentially

emboldened far-right extremists like Andrew Christo Nelson. Without legal
consequences, these groups grow in confidence, increasing their recruitment
efforts and promoting violence with little fear of reprisal.
● Public Safety Threat: The RCMP’s failure to investigate domestic
extremism seriously puts the public, particularly marginalized communities,
at greater risk. Hate speech and threats of violence are precursors to
real-world acts of harm, and ignoring them only exacerbates the potential for
violence.

2. The Weakened Role of the CHRC After Section 13’s Repeal

The Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) was once a key player in
addressing hate speech and discrimination, particularly online. However, the
repeal of Section 13 has left the CHRC without the tools to investigate or act on
complaints related to online hate speech.

Key Failures of the CHRC:

● Loss of Jurisdiction: With the repeal of Section 13, the CHRC no longer
has the authority to investigate hate speech disseminated through
telecommunications or the internet, which are now the primary methods
used by hate groups to spread their ideologies.
● Diminished Public Trust: The CHRC’s inability to respond to hate speech
complaints has eroded public trust, particularly among communities targeted
by hate groups. Individuals seeking justice or protection from hate crimes are
left with no recourse, as the criminal system does not prioritize these cases.

3. Failures of the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission (CRCC)

The Civilian Review and Complaints Commission (CRCC) is responsible for

overseeing the conduct of the RCMP and ensuring accountability. However, in cases
involving hate groups and far-right extremism, the CRCC has failed to take
meaningful action.

Key Failures of the CRCC:

● Lack of Enforcement Power: While the CRCC has the ability to investigate
complaints, it lacks the enforcement power to compel the RCMP to act on its
recommendations. This lack of authority has allowed the RCMP to continue
dismissing or deprioritizing hate speech cases with little consequence.
● Failure to Investigate Complaints: Numerous complaints filed against the
RCMP for its inaction in hate speech cases have been either ignored or
slow-walked by the CRCC. This further enables hate groups to continue
operating without accountability.

4. Political Indifference from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)

At the highest levels of Canadian politics, there has been a notable indifference
toward the rise of far-right extremism and neo-Nazism. The Prime Minister’s
Office (PMO) and other key government figures have largely focused on other
issues, allowing the problem of domestic extremism to grow unchecked.

Key Issues with the PMO’s Approach:

● Lack of Urgency: Despite the clear threat posed by far-right groups, the PMO
has failed to prioritize the fight against domestic extremism. Resources and
attention have been directed toward other forms of terrorism, leaving gaps in
addressing white supremacy and neo-Nazism.
 ● Empowering Hate through Political Rhetoric: Conservative rhetoric that
flirts with far-right talking points has created an environment where hate
groups feel validated. The repeal of Section 13 and the refusal to reinstate or
replace it with modern hate speech protections send a message that free
speech protections take precedence over public safety when it comes to
hate speech.

Consequences of Institutional Failures

The collective failure of the RCMP, CHRC, CRCC, and PMO to address
neo-Nazism and far-right extremism has had devastating consequences. Hate
groups have been allowed to flourish, spreading their ideologies and threatening
public safety. Meanwhile, marginalized communities—particularly LGBTQ+
individuals, immigrants, and racial minorities—are left unprotected, with no
recourse to seek justice or defend themselves from targeted hate.

These failures undermine public trust in Canadian institutions and put Canada at
risk of becoming a haven for far-right extremists, whose actions and rhetoric are
growing increasingly violent.

This section highlights the systemic institutional failures that have allowed
neo-Nazism and far-right extremism to thrive in Canada. Each institution—whether
law enforcement, human rights, or political leadership—has failed to act decisively,
leading to a rise in dangerous groups like the Thule Society Moncton.

VI. Consequences of Failing to Act

1. The Spread of Neo-Nazi Ideologies and Hate Groups

The failure of Canadian institutions to take decisive action against far-right extremists
like Andrew Christo Nelson has led to the unchecked spread of neo-Nazi
ideologies and the growth of hate groups throughout the country. This has resulted
in the normalization of white supremacist rhetoric, Nazi symbols, and violent
extremism, both online and offline.

Key impacts of this unchecked growth include:

● Increased Recruitment: Extremist groups like the Thule Society Moncton

have used online platforms, such as social media, encrypted apps, and the
dark web, to recruit new members. Their hate-filled propaganda targets
 vulnerable individuals, drawing them into a community of extremism where
anti-Semitic, racist, and homophobic views are encouraged.
● Cross-Border Extremism: The globalization of far-right movements,
particularly through the internet, has made it easier for Canadian extremists to
collaborate with international hate groups. Groups like the Thule Society
Moncton draw inspiration from and collaborate with far-right movements in the
United States and Europe, fostering a dangerous international network of
white supremacists.
● Normalized Hate Speech: As hate speech has been allowed to proliferate
unchecked, it has become increasingly normalized in public discourse. Nazi
symbols, once universally recognized as symbols of violence and hate, are
now being openly displayed, while racist, anti-LGBTQ+, and anti-immigrant
rhetoric is being spread without legal consequence.

2. Threats to Marginalized Communities

The rise of groups like the Thule Society Moncton has put marginalized
communities across Canada in immediate danger. Nelson and his group specifically
target LGBTQ+ individuals, liberals, anti-fascists, immigrants, and racial
minorities. The threats posed by these groups go beyond words—extremist
movements have a history of turning violent when left unchecked.

● Violence and Harassment: Hate groups like Nelson’s not only incite violence
online but also engage in real-world harassment, threats, and attacks against
those they target. Far-right extremism has been linked to acts of violence
against synagogues, mosques, and LGBTQ+ community centers in both
Canada and abroad.
● Impact on Mental Health and Safety: Targeted communities, including racial
minorities and LGBTQ+ individuals, have reported increased fear for their
safety and mental health strain as a result of the rising tide of extremism.
The constant threat of harassment and violence has left these communities
vulnerable, particularly in areas where far-right groups are active.

3. Damage to Canada’s Global Reputation as a Defender of Human Rights

Canada has long prided itself on its reputation as a global leader in human rights,
multiculturalism, and democracy. However, the country’s failure to address the
rise of neo-Nazism and far-right extremism has tarnished that image, calling into
question its commitment to protecting minorities and combating hate.

● Erosion of Global Trust: Canada’s inaction has led to international

criticism, as other countries and human rights organizations recognize the
growing problem of extremism within its borders. Canada’s inability to address
domestic hate groups is seen as a failure to uphold the very values it
promotes on the global stage.
 ● Potential for International Isolation: As far-right movements grow more
violent and organized, there is a risk that Canada could become a haven for
extremists, further isolating it from global human rights efforts. International
allies, including the United States and European Union, may begin to view
Canada as a weak link in the global fight against far-right extremism.

4. Increasing Threat of Domestic Terrorism

Unchecked far-right extremism represents a significant terrorism threat to

national security. Many of these groups openly advocate for the overthrow of
governments, violent insurrections, and targeted attacks on political leaders and
minority communities. Andrew Christo Nelson’s glorification of the January 6
Capitol insurrection in the United States is a clear example of how Canadian
extremists are inspired by and aligned with violent movements abroad.

● Domestic Terrorism Threat: Nelson’s calls for a second insurrection in the

United States and his repeated threats against Prime Minister Justin
Trudeau and President Joe Biden demonstrate the growing potential for
domestic terrorism within Canada. Far-right groups, when left unchecked,
have a well-documented history of turning to violent tactics, including the
use of weapons and explosives.
● Radicalization of Youth: Extremist groups, particularly those operating
online, often target young, disenfranchised individuals, seeking to
radicalize them with hate-filled propaganda. The radicalization of youth is
particularly dangerous because it creates long-term followers who are
deeply committed to extremist ideologies, making them more likely to engage
in acts of terrorism or politically motivated violence.

Concluding Remarks on the Consequences

The institutional failure to address neo-Nazism and far-right extremism in Canada

has led to dire consequences for both the country’s domestic safety and its
international standing. Hate groups have been allowed to spread unchecked,
leading to increased violence, harassment, and a growing threat of domestic
terrorism. The normalization of hate speech and propaganda has endangered
marginalized communities, while Canada's global reputation as a defender of
human rights has suffered significantly. Immediate action is needed to prevent
further escalation of violence and to safeguard Canada’s democratic values.
This section outlines the far-reaching consequences of failing to address the rise of
far-right extremism in Canada, highlighting the direct threats to public safety,
marginalized communities, and Canada's global reputation.

VII. Legal Avenues to Prosecute Andrew Christo Nelson Despite Section

13's Repeal

Despite the repeal of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which limited
the ability to address hate speech in civil courts, several Criminal Code provisions
still offer legal avenues to prosecute Andrew Christo Nelson for his involvement in
promoting neo-Nazi ideology, inciting violence, and making threats. Below are key
sections of the Criminal Code of Canada that can be applied to Nelson’s actions.

1. Section 319: Public Incitement of Hatred and Hate Propaganda

Section 319 of the Criminal Code deals with the promotion of hatred against
identifiable groups and is often used to prosecute hate speech that incites violence.
Nelson’s use of Nazi symbols, such as the swastika, and his public statements
encouraging violence against marginalized groups, including LGBTQ+ individuals,
liberals, and anti-fascists, are clear violations of this section.

● Section 319 (1): This section prohibits public incitement of hatred where
such speech is likely to lead to a breach of the peace. Nelson’s threats
against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his call for violent
insurrections clearly fit within this framework, particularly as his rhetoric
includes explicit calls for violence.
● Section 319 (2): This section criminalizes the willful promotion of hatred
against any identifiable group. Nelson’s propagation of Nazi imagery and
racist propaganda targeted at LGBTQ+ individuals and racial minorities
could be prosecuted under this section, as his intent to spread hate and incite
violence is clear in his communications.

2. Section 264.1: Uttering Threats

Section 264.1 of the Criminal Code makes it illegal to utter threats to cause death
or bodily harm. Nelson’s statement that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is a “dead
man walking” and his encouragement of violence against public officials, such as
President Joe Biden, are actionable under this section.

● Key Violations: Nelson’s threats against Trudeau and calls for a second
insurrection in the United States against liberal governments pose a direct
threat to both domestic and international public safety. These threats,
 particularly when directed at political figures, can be prosecuted under this
section as they clearly incite violence and unrest.

3. Section 83.19: Participation in Terrorist Activity

While neo-Nazi extremism is often addressed under hate crime legislation, it can
also be prosecuted under the terrorism provisions of the Criminal Code if it
involves organized violence or terroristic intent. Section 83.19 specifically addresses
participation in terrorist activity, which can include promoting or encouraging
actions that threaten national security.

● Terrorism and Insurrection: Nelson’s glorification of far-right violence and

his calls for an insurrection against the Canadian and U.S. governments could
be interpreted as encouragement of domestic terrorism. Given the global
rise in far-right terrorism, these actions could be seen as promoting
terroristic violence.

4. Section 22: Counseling to Commit an Offense

Section 22 of the Criminal Code makes it a criminal offense to counsel or

encourage someone to commit an illegal act, whether or not the act is ultimately
carried out. In Nelson’s case, his offers of money to incite violence against
individuals ("fight Paul and I’ll pay you $60") clearly fall under this provision.

● Counseling Violence: Even if the violence Nelson encourages does not

materialize, his explicit attempts to incite violence through financial
incentives could still lead to criminal charges under this section.

5. Section 423: Intimidation

Section 423 criminalizes actions intended to intimidate others into doing or abstaining
from something by means of violence, threats, or coercion. Nelson’s rhetoric,
particularly when targeting political figures and anti-fascists, includes explicit
elements of intimidation aimed at discouraging opposition to his neo-Nazi
ideology.

● Intimidation and Coercion: Nelson’s attempts to intimidate liberals,

LGBTQ+ activists, and other marginalized groups through threats of violence
could be prosecuted under this section, as it creates a climate of fear intended
to silence opposition.

6. Section 372: Harassing Communications

Section 372 prohibits the use of telecommunications to harass, threaten, or

intimidate another person. Nelson’s use of social media platforms and encrypted
messaging apps to spread hate speech, Nazi propaganda, and threats of
violence could fall under this section.
 ● Online Harassment: Nelson’s repeated use of Facebook Messenger and
other platforms to harass and threaten others, particularly marginalized
communities, can be considered harassing communications, which is a
criminal offense under Canadian law.

Conclusion: The Legal Grounds for Prosecution

Despite the repeal of Section 13, Nelson’s actions clearly violate multiple sections
of the Criminal Code of Canada. His promotion of Nazi propaganda, utterance of
threats, counseling of violence, and participation in an organized hate group all
provide grounds for prosecution under existing hate crime, terrorism, and
harassment laws. These legal avenues remain available and should be pursued to
hold Nelson accountable for his extremist activities and to send a clear message that
hate speech, violence, and intimidation will not be tolerated in Canada.

This section provides a comprehensive analysis of the Criminal Code provisions

that can be used to prosecute Andrew Christo Nelson despite the repeal of
Section 13.

VIII. Proposed Legislative Solutions and Mitigation Strategies

1. Reinstating Section 13 or Introducing a Modernized Hate Speech Law

The repeal of Section 13 in 2013 left Canada without a critical tool for addressing
hate speech in the digital age. While the Criminal Code addresses hate crimes, it
does so with a high burden of proof, making it difficult to prevent hate speech before
it leads to violence or broader harm. Therefore, a reinstatement of Section 13, or a
new, modernized law, is necessary to address the unique challenges posed by
online hate speech.

Key Proposals:

● Reinstating Section 13 with Updates: Reintroduce Section 13 of the

Canadian Human Rights Act, but modernize it to cover not just
telecommunications but also social media and online platforms. The new
law should give the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) the
authority to investigate hate speech complaints related to the internet and
impose fines or civil penalties to prevent the spread of extremist ideologies.
● Creating Clear Definitions: The updated law should provide clear legal
definitions of what constitutes hate speech, ensuring it includes Nazi
 propaganda, racist rhetoric, and calls for violence against identifiable
groups. It must balance free speech protections while ensuring that harmful,
violent speech is addressed before it escalates.
● Preemptive Action: The purpose of such a law would be to allow for
preemptive action before hate speech leads to violent action or mass
recruitment for extremist movements. By giving the CHRC or similar bodies
the power to intervene early, authorities can de-escalate dangerous situations
and protect vulnerable communities.

2. Establishing a National Hate Crimes Task Force

Canada lacks a specialized national unit dedicated to addressing the rise of far-right
extremism and hate crimes, particularly those that occur online. Establishing a
National Hate Crimes Task Force within the RCMP would be an essential step in
combating the spread of hate speech and extremist violence.

Key Functions:

● Specialized Training: This task force would provide specialized training to

law enforcement officers on how to track and investigate online hate groups,
including those that operate on encrypted platforms like the dark web.
Officers would also be trained in cyber-forensics to effectively prosecute
individuals like Andrew Christo Nelson.
● Coordination with Digital Platforms: The task force would work closely with
social media companies, encrypted messaging apps, and hosting
platforms to track and remove extremist content. By requiring these
platforms to report hate speech incidents and comply with investigations,
law enforcement would be able to better monitor and disrupt hate group
activities.
● Proactive Investigations: The task force would focus on proactively
identifying and monitoring hate groups before their actions escalate into
violence, thus addressing the issue at an earlier stage.

3. Holding Social Media Platforms Accountable for Hate Speech

As a major conduit for the spread of hate speech and neo-Nazi propaganda,
social media platforms must be held accountable for the content they host. New
legislation should require these platforms to take swift action against hate speech
and ensure they comply with legal requests for information on hate group
activities.

Key Proposals:

● Mandatory Reporting: Social media platforms should be required to report

instances of hate speech and extremist content to law enforcement
 agencies within a 48-hour window. Failure to do so would result in
substantial fines or legal penalties.
● Content Removal: Platforms must remove content that violates hate speech
laws within a specific timeframe or face penalties. They should also provide
transparent reporting on how many hate speech cases they handle and
what action was taken, ensuring accountability to the public.
● Fines for Non-Compliance: Establish hefty fines for platforms that fail to act
on clear instances of hate speech. These fines would escalate with each
violation, incentivizing platforms to implement stricter content moderation
policies.

4. Creating Checks and Balances for Free Speech Protections

To ensure that hate speech laws are not used to unjustly infringe on free speech,
there should be clear checks and balances built into any new or updated
legislation. While it is important to combat hate speech, it is equally critical to protect
legitimate political discourse, satire, and artistic expression.

Key Proposals:

● Independent Review Board: Establish an Independent Review Board to

oversee cases related to hate speech, ensuring that decisions are made
impartially and with respect for free speech rights. Individuals who feel
wrongly accused or prosecuted under hate speech laws should have the right
to appeal their case to this board.
● Appeals Process: Ensure that individuals or organizations who believe they
have been wrongly accused of promoting hate speech have access to a
clear and fair appeals process, where they can challenge the charges
against them. This would prevent misuse of hate speech laws to silence
legitimate criticism or dissent.
● Public Education: Educate the public on the difference between hate
speech and protected free speech to prevent confusion and reduce the
number of false complaints. Clear guidelines should be issued to help citizens
understand what constitutes criminal hate speech versus protected
expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Conclusion: A Call for Legislative Reform and Action

Canada’s failure to adequately address hate speech, neo-Nazism, and far-right

extremism can no longer be ignored. The repeal of Section 13 created a legal
vacuum that has allowed hate groups like the Thule Society Moncton, led by
Andrew Christo Nelson, to spread their toxic ideologies without facing legal
consequences. However, existing Criminal Code provisions offer clear pathways
for prosecution, and it is critical that law enforcement, social media platforms, and
the Canadian government work together to restore a legal framework capable of
addressing these challenges in the digital age.

Implementing these legislative reforms—such as reinstating or modernizing Section

13, establishing a National Hate Crimes Task Force, holding social media
platforms accountable, and creating checks and balances to protect free
speech—will help Canada regain control in the fight against far-right extremism
and neo-Nazism. It is time for Canada to take action, protect its citizens, and
restore its global reputation as a champion of human rights and multiculturalism.

IX. Conclusion: A Call for Urgent Action

Canada is at a critical crossroads in its fight against neo-Nazism and far-right

extremism. The case of Andrew Christo Nelson and his leadership of the Thule
Society Moncton exemplifies the dangers of allowing hate groups to flourish
unchecked in the absence of adequate legal and institutional responses. The repeal
of Section 13 has left a vacuum that has been exploited by extremists, and
Canadian institutions—from the RCMP to the CHRC—have failed to act decisively
against this rising threat.

The consequences of this inaction are clear: the unchecked spread of hate
propaganda, increasing violence and harassment toward marginalized communities,
and the growing potential for domestic terrorism. Canada’s international reputation
as a defender of human rights is at stake, and its failure to address far-right
extremism risks isolating it from the global fight against hate and terrorism.

However, this is not a problem without solutions. By reinstating or modernizing

Section 13, establishing a National Hate Crimes Task Force, and holding social
media platforms accountable for the content they host, Canada can take concrete
steps toward addressing the rise of neo-Nazism and far-right extremism. These
legislative reforms, combined with a renewed commitment from law enforcement and
the government, will provide the tools needed to protect vulnerable communities and
safeguard Canadian democracy.

The Moral Imperative to Act

Beyond the legal and institutional responses, there is a moral imperative for
Canada to take action. Far-right extremism and neo-Nazi ideology represent an
existential threat to the multicultural and inclusive society that Canada prides
itself on. Failing to act not only endangers the lives and safety of those targeted by
these groups, but it also undermines the very values that form the foundation of
Canadian democracy.

This paper has outlined the multiple ways in which Canadian institutions have failed
to protect their citizens and provided a roadmap for how they can rectify these
failures. Now, the responsibility lies with lawmakers, law enforcement, and civil
society to take the necessary steps to ensure that hate speech, violence, and
intimidation are no longer tolerated.

Final Appeal to Canadian Lawmakers and Institutions

This is a call to action for Canadian lawmakers and institutions. The failures of the
RCMP, CHRC, CRCC, and PMO to address the rise of neo-Nazism in Canada must
be confronted head-on. The evidence is clear, the consequences are dire, and the
tools to address these challenges are available. Canada must act swiftly to restore
its commitment to human rights, protect its marginalized communities, and
rebuild its global reputation as a country that does not tolerate hate or extremism.

It is time to reform the law, strengthen enforcement, and hold extremists

accountable for their actions. The fight against neo-Nazism and far-right
extremism is far from over, but by implementing the recommendations outlined in
this paper, Canada can begin to turn the tide and reclaim its place as a beacon of
democracy and human rights.

With this urgent call for action, Canada can move forward in the fight against
neo-Nazism and ensure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

This concludes the full paper.

Appendices: Screenshots below are evidence.