SteynOnline – The [Canadian Jewish Congress] says: “Mr. Steyn, however, rooted his assertions in quotations that Canadian Jewish Congress never uttered. Maclean’s apologizes for this misattribution in its current issue.”
That’s not true, actually. Maclean’s issued not an “apology” but a clarification, “regretting any confusion”. As reflexively litigious as he is, Bernie Farber surely knows the difference – especially as there was an awful lot of back and forth between the various legal departments. My memory of the deliberations is that Bernie originally wanted Maclean’s to “apologize” for any “hurt” caused by such “defamatory” statements as “the only plausible explanation for the CJC is that it’s an Islamist front organization”. My reaction was that I’d personally fight such a case all the way to the Supreme Court because (a) it would be a non-stop laugh riot; and (b) Bernie’s peculiar touchiness on the subject suggests the odds are better than even that my joke would turn out to be true.
Tag Archives: Mark Steyn
The Corner – Not in modern Britain. Her Majesty’s Constabulary are among the laziest, most overpaid, most obnoxious and most useless in the world. It was entirely predictable that, given the choice between taking on violent ne’er-do-wells or harrassing harmless old-timers with pocket knives, they’d choose the latter…
Maclean’s – Because, after all, nothing says “restraint” and “respect” and “civility” more than a snarling mob using the threat of violence to shut down those it dislikes—and all for that beloved “Canadian tradition.” Strange that the more Canada congratulates itself on its “tolerance” the less it’s prepared to tolerate.
Toronto Sun – In an effort to be more efficient, the Canadian Human Rights Commission is closing three regional offices later this year…
And that’s what worries Ezra Levant, a free speech advocate and critic of the commission.
“My fear is that … they are just shutting down wasteful costly branch offices to regroup and be even more brutal out of their Stalinist bunker in Ottawa,” Levant said Friday. “Instead of spending money on rent and phones and things like that, they’re going to put more money into abusing our human rights.”
Five Feet of Fury – Yep, this is an amazing coincidence, but let’s have fun with it anyway: the government is finally closing down three Canadian Human Rights Commission offices!…
DWE – Great News. Justice Minister Says Human Rights Commission Answers To No One
CNW – The Public Service Alliance of Canada condemns the Harper government’s decision to close Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) offices in Vancouver, Toronto and Halifax. The union maintains that the closure of the three offices will make it substantially harder for individuals from marginalized groups to launch human rights complaints.
The three offices slated for closure received 70 per cent of all signed complaints to the CHRC in 2008.
Update: Not what you think.
Steyn Online – If this doesn’t kill the laziest trope of the brain-dead statist control freak, nothing will. This was a literal re-enactment of the full Oliver Wendell: In Ottawa, the fire alarm was set off even though there was no fire but only a visiting conservative blonde.
Steyn Online – I’m freer than I’ve ever been in Canada. I can say what I like and no “human rights” commission will accept a complaint against me ever again. Go on, try it. Because they know that, if they do, it’s not about me, it’s about them…If you stand up to the state enforcers and you fight them nimbly and publicly, they lose. When you go Magna Carta on Jennifer Lynch’s medieval ass, she can’t take it, and like all bullies she’ll slink off to kick around an easier victim.
Salim Mansuir – In several of my recent columns published in this paper, I have contended that Geert Wilders, the Dutch MP on trial for hate speech in Amsterdam’s Court of Appeal, has the right to express freely — irrespective of whether I, or Muslims in general, find his views offensive — what he thinks about Muslims, Islam and the Qur’an.
The trial of Wilders in Holland indicates how persistent the temptation is within a liberal society to resort to illiberal means in dealing with situations that might cause some public unease. Complaints against Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn and Maclean’s magazine before various human rights commissions in Canada are other examples.
[Media Monitors, Greg Felton] The human rights case against Maclean’s magazine, discussed in my last column, has significance beyond the anti-Muslim defamation that writer Mark Steyn is charged with committing. Of much greater importance is the smear campaign being launched against the country’s human rights tribunals in the mainstream media and by unhinged bloggers.
Steyn’s apologists have concocted a revisionist reality in which po’ li’l Marky is not the bloviating windbag of anti-Muslim paranoia that his writing would seem to suggest; rather, he is a victim of government censorship and a poster boy for free speech.
My book The Host and the Parasite–How Israel’s Fifth Column Consumed America is available exclusively from GregFelton.com until I can find an honest publisher.
CHRC punted on Steyn. OHRC punted on Steyn. AHRC now punts on Levant. BCHRT…you’re up! Come on, chickenshits. You nailed McDonald’s for handwashing, surely you can bust Steyn for a hate crime. Or will you punt, too?
[CBC] The Alberta Human Rights Commission has dismissed a complaint against publisher Ezra Levant for reprinting the provocative Danish Muhammad cartoons in his magazine in 2006.
The complaint was filed by the Edmonton Council of Muslim Communities.
Levant, who has characterized the controversy as a free speech issue, said he was pleased with the outcome and pledged to continue fighting against censorship.
[Times and Transcript] So what if none of us ever got to say what we thought was important?
What if when I tried to write about vegetarianism the meat lobby had me shut down. What if the coffee federation silenced me when I said we should pay more for a cup of coffee because the labourers don’t make enough? What if the government brought me up on charges when I suggest that detainees are being treated unfairly in military prisons?
If you have been reading Maclean’s magazine this year you will realize that Canada has such a thing as a Human Rights Court, which is not really a court in a standard legal system, but a court where any individual whatsoever can bring charges that you have somehow written or published hate literature against some group.
[Burnaby Now] The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal members should feel ashamed.
Comedian Guy Earle is now the latest target heading for a showdown at the tribunal over comments Earle allegedly made while at an open microphone during a weekly standup comedy night in March of this year.
The revelation that Earle is now scrambling for legal advice comes just weeks after the human rights tribunal sat for several days to hear a complaint about an article written by journalist Mark Steyn and published in Maclean’s magazine.
[Vancouver Sun] Maclean’s rejoiced, saying the Steyn article was a “worthy piece of commentary on important geopolitical issues, entirely within the bounds of normal journalistic practice.”
That’s a bit rich. Still, I defy anyone to read the piece — “The Future Belongs to Islam,” an excerpt from the right-wing pundit’s book, America Alone — and conclude it’s anything more than an acerbic diatribe.
Defy “anyone?” Like, say, three law students, or the head of the CIC, or…
[Christie Blatchford, Globe and Mail] About 10 minutes later, a fellow passenger warned me that she thought the clerk had called security. I couldn’t believe it, and kept reading, and sure enough, within a few minutes, a young woman with a walkie-talkie in her hands (I guess so if I suddenly turned into a human missile she could call for help) asked to speak to me. She’d had a report about “an incident,” she said. So I told her through gritted teeth what had happened, she magnanimously agreed it was “not illegal” to say what I’d said, apologized and went on her way.
When we boarded a little later, I asked for the ninny’s name. He refused and hissed, “If you make a scene, I’ll call the pilot and you won’t be flying tonight.”
CIC Director: Most People In Democratic Societies Meet With Magazine Editors When Angered By Articles
Wow. They must have big waiting rooms over at Maclean’s and Newsweek.
[Ottawa Citizen] Faced with such content, a group of Muslim law students did what most citizens of a democratic society would do. They met with Maclean’s editors and asked for a response. Varying versions have emerged of what occurred but the crux is that they demanded a response and Maclean’s editors refused to publish one.
[New York Times] It is an everyday symbol, touching almost, of Italy’s troubled demographics: an older Italian out for some air, at times arm in arm with an immigrant aide. The aides often are not here legally but have been tolerated because they do work few Italians do: care for the nation’s rapidly aging population.
But much as Italy is growing older, it is also more worried about crime. And in the eyes of many Italians, for whom immigration is a relatively new phenomenon, immigrants also have a central role in this.
[Alicia Colon, New York Sun] I recommend that we evict the Useless Notion and export it to a country that appreciates effete diplomacy. France, which just convicted Brigitte Bardot of inciting Islamaphobia for writing a letter critical of Muslim immigrants, might be a possibility, although President Sarkozy may turn out to be our best ally. Canada’s another choice. The thought police on its Human Rights Commission put Mark Steyn on trial for the same offense because he quoted something that offended the Canadian Islamic community. A Canadian investigator for the commission, Dean Steacy, said: “Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.”
More international bad press for Canadian human rights commissions.
[NRO] The human-rights tribunals are a censor’s dream. Under Canada’s human-rights act, commissioners can convict if they believe any published material is “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt.” Since they are “remedial” institutions and not real courts, they need not follow strict legal procedures or grant traditional rights of the accused. No one goes to prison, but the panels can fine and silence people at will — and run up the lawyer bills for years. Truth is no defense, and commissioners are authorized to confiscate a computer without a warrant. Evidence can be woefully flimsy.
[Abbotsford Times] Right off the top, I’m going to say that I don’t think Steyn is guilty of any crime, that I don’t think he should be penalized, fined, jailed and not censored for his article or his book.
Free speech is our single most valuable right, and it should not be compromised.
That said, Steyn is dead wrong.
Not a great article, as he winds up saying Steyn’s theories “could” be right (far different from “dead wrong”), but at least he said something without ratting to teacher.
FLASH: Mark Steyn draws audiences in Starbucks by typing on a computer.
[The Record] Disgustingly, this isn’t even the worst Steyn has written publicly.
[Vancouver Sun, Letters to the Editor] Will human rights commissions across Canada listen to what he’s saying before they stifle freedom of expression, a sign of a healthy, thriving democracy cherished by many immigrants?
[Mark Mercer, Ottawa Citizen] Now on the other side, to balance against all this, is harm, the harm that expressions of hate cause vulnerable people. Restrictions on expressions, most of us can agree, though some of us will agree with regret, are justified when they are needed to protect people from harm.
For a restriction on expression to be legitimate, though, there must be good reason to think that its presence will indeed prevent harm. Harm, moreover, that cannot be as efficiently prevented any other way. In addition, there must be good reason to think the restriction will not create more or worse harm than it prevents.
[Lillooet News] The hysteria greeting a B.C. Human Rights Tribunal hearing on charges that Maclean’s magazine incited hatred against Muslims is kind of creepy.
The critics of the process are right; it is a threat to free speech. And the issues are important.
But the rhetoric and the casting of the case as the last battleground in defence of Western civilization has been over the top. By time the hearing concluded, the public battering of the Muslim complainants started to look a lot like a one-sided schoolyard brawl.
More international bad press for the Canadian human rights commissions.
[Post Chronicle] Freedom of the press is on trial in Canada.
The trial is before a court with the Orwellian title of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal. The accused are Maclean’s magazine and author Mark Steyn. The crime: In mocking and biting tones, they wrote that Islam threatens Western values.