I think I will lodge a complaint with the "Human Rights Tribunal" (oh MAN, that sounds scary and 1984-ish) against the writer and sellers of the Koran.

It contains inflammatory comments, and offensive hate speech against Westerners, including, gays, lesbians, communists, socialists, atheists, gaia worshippers, animal worshippers (PETA), big city liberals, teeth seekers, the list goes on and on...

right on doug...go for it but unfortunately there is no such thing as reverse discrimination in the land of free speech etc etc

i should have added to the above post that its a minority thing thanks to out charter of so called rights. few seem to acknowledge that in many parts of the country whitey is or is rapidily becoming a minority.

Good idea, Doug.

There's a nice article by Gerard Alexander in the Weekly Standard on 'Illiberal Europe; the long and growing list of things you can't legally say'

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/055sbhvq.asp

It is incredible; "speech laws have been dramatically expanded to sanction speech that 'incites hatred' against groups based on their religion, race, ethnicity, or several other characteristics".

Now- what and how do you show, objectively and empirically, 'hatred'?? How do you show direct cause between what X-said - and the 'hatred of Y-person towards this ethnic group?? How do you prove this link?

And Alexander continues: "these incitement laws are being interpreted so loosely that they chill not just extremist views but mainstream ones too...the result is a serious distortion and impoverishment of political debate".

Essentially, you cannot critique anything. You can't say a thing about the very real problem in Islam, which is that it is a religion promoting a tribal mode of life and completely unsuited to a modern civic mode of life.

And, you cannot examine the fact that extremist Islam also has a political and not merely religious agenda. To do so, means that you are 'discriminating' against the religion. The fact that the religion incorporates a set of laws that would bring the industrial economy to a screeching halt, that treat women as slaves, that treat otherness as evil...can't be discussed.

You cannot say anything that is 'offensive to religious or political beliefs"

The result of this type of 'speech laws', which are being assisted in Canada, to develop, by our own Human Rights Commissions..which are going far beyond their original mandate and are moving into 'speech control'...is the removal of the very essence of being human - the removal of the right to think, question, analyze, and come to reasoned conclusions.

This right is being taken from us. We must not question, analyze..if such questions and analysis and conclusions 'upset someone', or 'expose them to 'hatred' (???a subjective action).

Interesting, that these Human Rights Commissions are readily acting on complaints against free speech ...but say nothing about rampant anti-Americanism.

But, asAlexander points out, these 'speech laws' make the error (as did Truth Seeker) of conflating bigoted speech with constructive, analytic criticism. These are two kinds of speech that should be 'sharply distinguised from each other".

If we post rates of crime..and it reflects unfavorable on various groups - is that bigoted or valid? But, the group could complain that it 'incites hatred'..and so on.

Free speech, the right and duty to ask questions, to analyze, to critique - is THE most important right we have. We must not let the left destroy it.

This group is like a Moonbat Collective.

I am so glad they are smarter and better than poor slobs like me.

I am suprised they can find the time to intervene in these cases. You would think it would be full time job just trying to remove their heads from up their arse ends.

ET,
That was an intersting article, thanks.

Laws criminalizing Holocaust denial or minimization were adopted well into the 1990s in France, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, and other European countries (and several countries outside Europe).

Do you suppose that any of those "anti-holocaust" laws would apply to the president of Iran?

No, but they are sure hot to throw Oriana Fallaci in the slammer, not for inciting hatred, but for stating facts.

The MSM would love nothing more than Cultural extinction of Western values. Of democracy & decency. There well on the way with an almost none existent liberal birth rate, caused in art by hysterical fantasies about over population. That they despise & really Hate democratic institutions is an obvious given. That they see as road bocks to Utopia. They now have to postulate for converts with there mental sewage.

They have championed an educational system less effective than the one used at the end of the 19nth century. History civics & Latin . The latter is not taught because lawyers & dr's would than not have a hold of there priestly tongue. The more to be dazzle us with terms & language easily learned & would demystify law, medicine & science.

Law has shifted to trial by judge instead of jury with the coda that juries cannot be as trusted as these wise men.

News is there divine tabula Rasa, upon which they can write there poison in the guise of Progressivism. There opinion is the only viable one. All others are impostures , with no social conscience.

The have marginalized Religion into impotency for good of even charity. One cannot say the name of Jesus Publicly in prayer , yet Islam can do anything. Same with any other Religion or cult. Its Christ these liberals hate. Not religion.

They have made our political institutions rugs on which to tread, by the toadying to those in power with like aspirations of total power & control of the economy & thoughts & actions of its ex citizens. Now helots threw oppressive taxation & regulation.

Our family institutions have been reviled as well as religious holidays. The MSM seems to think this is there’s to decide ,& we must go along with there divine wisdom. In there minds gay marriage is natural & hetro family’s are the abnormal ones.

These trogolites have invaded every institution we have & desecrated them all.

More like a cultural evolution of Western values is going on.

Remarkable how blind can these people be? Good is bad and vice versa. Why the campaign to destroy Western civilization? Who is behind this evil? I know there are talking heads fronting this but who is coming up with drivel.

Commonsense is a commodity with no value. Can it be that various disparite groups and individuals all believe in Utopia? Do they think that they are so special that they will be the few that escape persecution or prosecution for their activities and thoughts? Is there a central power behind this directing people to make these wild and illogical proclamations and ultimately attempt to put them into unenforcable laws?

Did these same people not see at the worst of the tax and spend policies in Canada and elsewhere, the economy simply went underground. At one point it was thought that 30% of the Canadian economy was underground. So to will democracy. Democracy ultimately overcomes tyranny simply because individuals always have their own self-interest at heart.

Has the left become so cowardly that they actively attempt to regulate those who stand up for our way of life. A life that my Grandparents froze and starved to help bring to Canada.

Jeff Cosford.

Think Jehovah Witness. They have made four predictions of the end of the Earth. Folks still follow this group, even when all four have proven wrong. According to there own theology only 100,000 will be saved. Yet millions belong.
I wish I had an answer for you.

For a little light humor:

I came accross this quote today. The first thing too pop into my head was Pammy Anderson

The finest woman that ever walked the streets.
- Mae West

I know I am sounding pretty maudlin today but the left can be so exasperating with all the sniping from the sidelines and the only solutions they have is to either ignore the problem and maybe it will go away or begin to persecute the victims. Maddness.

As for Pammy all I can say is WOW on so many different levels.LOL.

This is a MEGA tempest-in-a-teapot.I'm sure Ezra is the happiest man in Canada these days.
You can't buy publicity this good,well,except for maybe running some notorious cartoons in the first place.
He dubbed himself the saviour of free speech by running those cartoons.Now I'm sure he's revelling in standing up for this cause AGAIN by standing up against those evil ones who would dare stifle us.Especially when you consider the radio and press interviews,increased magazine and advertising sales and donations for his cause....he's doing juuuust fine!

Nope,you just can't buy publicity this good.....

Can anyone tell me what BCCLA stands for? My computer won't open the link for some reason.

CC....it stands for BC Civil Liberties Association

BTW,put on a sweater!

www.bccla.org

B.C. Civil Liberties Association

...did I miss something, or didn't the local Calgary Jewish paper/magazine print them too?

Talk about a powder keg...

Thanks. Obviously I wasn't quite hanging with the right crowds when I went to university there... How could I have missed that? Too many college nights, not enough protest rallys.

Hope you found the sweater CC

If anyone in this world deserves to have their butt sued off, it's Ezra. The guy's been asking for it for years. Finally, someone sat up and gave him what he so desperately wants: attention. Hope it was worth $75,000. Ha ha!!

How is it that BCCLA "has decided" and "will enter" the situation.

Isn't this for the Commission to decide based on a formal application for intervenor status? It will be bad enough if the Commission even decides to hear this case without also allowing any civil rights organizations to have status.

Perhaps a whole lot of us can "just decide to intervene" as well, As a whole lot of cultures were listed off by BCCLA as being negatively affected, I didn't see anything about whites - like there is no -ve WASP stuff out there! Give me a break!

In other countries - violence, burnings, and worse are the choice. Here the choice is the court system and sadly, our courts have created a landscape where political correctness to the extreme is pretty much in vogue (aka reverse discrimination).

All it takes is money and time. For those who want to decry every little thing that is "not very nice" and seek a remedy via the court have lots of both.

This is simply intimidation in another form. Perhaps it is time for the concept of reverse discrimination to be aruged in court as well.

a google search of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal proves very interesting.

An H.R.commission was created in 1977 (read liberal). After 1988 it began to operate increasingly independent (read conservative). In 1998 it was enshrined as The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal and granted the authority to act independently of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. (read liberal).

Time to pay attention, focus on the legal issues, and temporarily put emotions on hold.

I have to wonder exactly who it is that has put the complaint re the blog control (referred to by the BCCLA) before the Canadian Tribunal.

Soooo - "someone" is now going after the publishing angle and another "someone" is going after a blog. And why not!!! Let's do this in two separate jurisdictions with 2 different complaints and perhaps even with two different complainants. This is not sounding very good at all.

Jeff - it is warmer today. But if the sweater is not quite right, I hope to get the BCCLA onside. I don't wish to offend.

Isn't This Wonderful

NP/Page A12/April 7/Editorial by George Jonas

Alan Borovoy,the general counsel for Canadian Civil Liberties Association and an architect of Human Rights Commissions away back when, apparently has had a Duhhhhhh moment.

Apparently Borovoy never imagined just what the role would be of these Human Rights Commissions across Canada. He never imagined that they might ultimately be used against freedom of speech. He seems to be saying that a free culture cannot protect people against material that hurts.

Sooooo. If it is a fact that an architect of these Human Rights commissions now suggests that these same commissions should not be used to adjudicate freedom of speech - they why can't the AB Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal cite all of this as a reason for not hearing the two complaints that have been laid re the cartoons and the control of a blog.

At the very least, Borovoy (and other "architects") should be subpoened by the defence as a witness if either or both of these cases go forward.

If the architects agree that Commissions were never designed to be used in adjudicating freedom of speech, it begs the question - why should they be doing it now. It seems that they should not be and therefore should refuse to hear the case(s).

Commissions - another wonderful legacy of the Trudeau years and perpeuated by the Liberals.