Taxpayers funding the broadcast.... so get your money's worth and tune in for something of value for once on the McGuinty channel. ;-)

Don't forget about the O'Reilly Factor on Tuesday. After all, FOXNews is much better than any publicly funded programming found in Canada:

http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/blog/index/weblog/comments/8033/

I'm concerned about the guests. If I recall correctly, the one from the U of T, a Muslim, has quite a 'closed mind' about Islam. You can't criticize Islam.

I don't know the others. But, Agenda tends to have a slightly left perspective.

Again, the whole focus of this situation shouldn't be about Islam. It isn't about the opinions and beliefs we have.

It's about freedom of thought and speech. And the necessity for this freedom so that we can think, question, debate, dissent, argue. So that we, based on our questions and debates, can accept or reject opinions and beliefs, not live a life where the state tells us what opinions and beliefs to accept or reject.

I agree TVO is slanted to the left but have faith the other panelists whoever they are will NOT fare well in a battle of wits with Mr. Levant.
Steve Paikin should shut the hell up and not try to influence the debate. Go get them Ezra.

TVO's Agenda "slightly" left? It's big time left.

I used to be on quite friendly terms with Steve Paikin until he took exception to my concerns about the very skewed programming and panels, which happened over and over and over . . . again. Then he was downright nasty.

I'll watch tonight but am not expecting much from TVO. Ezra, I'm sure, will give them more than a run for their money. It would be nice if the panel's not stacked, a typical Agenda tactic.

Go, Ezra, go!

If I'm reading the show information correctly, Ezra is being interviewed on his own, then the four-person panel airs in a different segment.

which one of the panelists gets the bluetooth CBCpravda teleprompter for questions?

Any bets that the panel will not be loaded with leftists and/or Islamists? I expect every attempt will be made to prevent Ezra from responding and voicing his views. At least that has been the usual MO.

If anyone can beat them at this game, it will be someone like Ezra or Mark Steyn.

cal2, you've got it!

Looks like a stacked deck to me. Not one bit surprised.

Why cannot justice in this country be administered by JUDGES unstead of jumped up political appointees to a kangaroo court?

It's funny how the muslims get two mouthpieces to Levant's one. I don't know why anyone from the Catholic Civil Rights league would dare be anything else than a fence sitting budgie here - so count Joanne a no-show for saying anything of substance that opens Catholics up for muslim criticism. The Western U prof will probably try to strike a balance where none could really exist in a truly free society - how close did Sharia come to be adopted by Ontario on the advice of such academics?

Ezra is the only one in that group that can be counted on to defend our right to criticize. We'll see tonight as Little Mosque moves briefly to a new channel.

TVO's "Agenda" should be renamed "Socialist Agenda"

I don't think I could sit through 60 minutes of Steve Paikin

I'll look for the relevant highlights on SDA or Ezra's blogsite

TVO=

T o

V ascism

O nward!

The MSM, when they refer to this issue ( and the response has been scant at best ) appear to key in on the specific complaint, that being Muzzie vs. Jew. In fact, Levant's whole case is a much wider one. It is the problem of the chilling of free speech and the attendant problems if one doesn't adhere to the HRCs rules.
TVO is viewed by about 6 people on a good evening in Ontario, most of which are those that cannot afford cable TV and are restricted to rabbit-ears.
The rest are smelly hippies.
The impact of this program will be exactly zero. Unless of course, Ezra steps on his dick, in which case it will be headline news on tomorrow's CBC.

Could someone please enlighten me about who the four panelists are going to be. Under the heading GUESTS, at the TVO Website (linked from SDA) all I see is half a photo of Ezra and an explanation of who he is.

Then there's the heading PRODUCERS, and they name the TVO producer of the show, with a full frontal of his face and an explanation of who he is.

No mention, that I can see, of the panelists. Would someone please tell me who they are? I suspect that the deck will be stacked against Ezra Levant, as per usual on The Agenda panels. If not, I will be pleasantly and gratefully surprised.

We'll get fair commentary from FOX news when Levant and Steyn appear on O'Reilly's show tomorrow night.
There's nowhere in our media they would be afforded the same opportunity to put forth their cases without being interrupted to manipulate the facts by the partisan hacks.

Why am I not excited about Ezra's appearance on the Agenda tonight? It will result in more abuse, that's the nature of the Canadian MSM. We're on a very dangerous path aided and abetted by a partisan media out to destroy all things Conservative, including this Government. They care less about our Rights than they do about getting back to power. They'd trample their grannies to get back on the gravy train.

They're using the Banana Republic play book at that.

"Left leaning" is pretty funny.

To Paiken's credit he was fair to both sides of the political spectrum years ago, but now the show has devolved into a parade of stuffed shirts, self-appointed elites, and career university types who are completely out of touch with the man in the street. It's now a liberal's wet dream.

"Release Hell" Ezra

Hi been around

Click Kathie's 2nd link .
Then look at the top of the page above the title "The Interview: Ezra Levant" there is link titled
"Free Speech , Hate Speech and 4 corrupt bootlickers" or something close to that.
There's your information.

Now Iran is telling the west (Holland in this case) to repress free speech....and the liberal left throughout the west ignores, ignores, ignores...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,324406,00.html

Everyones fears of a "stacked deck" of panellists is true. Mohammad Fadel, the U of T guy, is listed as a professor of law. What kind of law? Canadian constitutional? Criminal? Corporate? No, Islamic law...better known as sharia law.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1460654/posts

What could be described as his pro-western bona fides include being a signatory to a "freedom of faith" declaration.

The short of it is that there don't appear to be any staunch defenders of freedom of speech. This is an issue which doesn't need to be any arguments over which shade of grey Canadians' freedoms are limited to.

Martin B. @ 5:20. I think your dismissal of the Catholic Civil Rights League may be misplaced.

We're about to see.

Being three time zones west of Ontari,ari,ari,o... with no TVO available

Does anyone know if this broadcast is likely to be up on YouTube or other systems?

"We'll get fair commentary from FOX news when Levant and Steyn appear on O'Reilly's show tomorrow night....."

hahahahhaahaha

First impression of the TVO show was that it was pretty reasonable all things considered. Ezra was calm and reasoned, and the panelists were actually all in agreement that HRC are probably a bad idea.

Not bad at all.

*
Watching TVO's Agenda...

Mohammad Fadel, who is apparently a professor in the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto...
and who is very critical of Ezra... is weaseling out of answering questions by claiming he is not
familiar with the Canadian law involved. He says the plaintiffs were "frustrated" and even though
as a lawyer he says the HRC is not being used appropriately here... he thinks poor Syed is justified
in going to the HRC.

Not an auspicious start to the discussion.

In contrast, Grant Huscroft, the associate dean at the Faculty of Law at the University of Western
Ontario... points out that in Canada we're generally not comfortable with criminalising free speech.
His best line... "What is the nexus between saying something and causing actual harm?"

A fairly typical east vs west p.o.v.

Ziyaad Mia, who is chair of Advocacy and Research with the Canadian Muslim Lawyers Association
says he wouldn't be going to a Human Rights Commission himself... but says some sort of general
unfairness is forcing poor Syed's hand. He also says frustration is what is driving the complaint.

Joanne McGarry, executive director of the Catholic Civil Rights League... was there to defend a
Bishop who apparently insulted some gays... who took him to the HRC and then dropped their complaint.

So frustration is supposed to somehow be a legal issue? This is mostly mush so far.

The general unspoken consensus is that Imam Syed is a dickhead... but
we should all play nice anyway... or this sort of thing (the HRC) will happen.

Ezra was the only part worth listening to at all.

*

landslide victory for Ezra, and a total shellacing of the hercs by the panel.

I was proven incorrect on this. The panel was quite balanced: more or less, two on two.

Grant Huscroft from Western U. was magnificent in defending freedom of speech.

The two Muslim lawyers--who proved it doesn't mean one has to be intelligent to become a lawyer--who ended up not really defending HRCs, were, generally, inarticulate and unfocused. Crybabies too. (Give me a break and grow up, you guys!)

Steve was almost speechless, though he did weigh in occasionally on the Western--as in civilization--side. I would have liked him to ask the Muslim gentlemen to give SPECIFIC examples of how Muslims have been detrimentally affected in Canada by the publication of either the cartoons or Mark Steyn's opinions.

Joanna of the Catholic Civil Rights League was somewhat weak but on our side.

TVO could have done far worse.

This is no time to be attacking TVO. Steve Paikin did a huge service to all Canadians getting this issue out into the open.

Ezra did a good job articulating himself. Of course, he added his usual "spice."

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to watch any of it except for about the last 20 minutes - missed Ezra.

Grant Huscroft, of U of Western Ontario was excellent. I would have wished for more articulation of exactly how impossible it is to draw a straight causal line between 'speech' and a resultant 'emotion of feeling hated'. Huscroft was saying that it can't be done, but it wasn't that clear.

The two Muslims were hesitant about the HRCs, and I was surprised at their unfamiliarity with the Human Rights Act, its history, with Section 13.1 and so on. After all, they knew they were to be on the show; they could have done a bit of research about the topic!

Their focus, from what I gathered, was that Muslims are perceived 'unfairly' in Canada. However, no legislation can remedy that; only the actions and speeches of Muslims can remedy that.

Therefore, if Canadian Muslims do not stand up and declare, loudly, that they reject Islamic fascism, that they respect the rights of other peoples to their religion; that they do not want Sharia law in Canada; that they respect our rule of law..and so on...well, they will be perceived, fairly, for their speeches and actions.

I'm glad it was aired; I'll try to see it later.

ET, the whole show will be on again later tonight, 11:00 p.m., I think.

"How did it come to be that rough and, I would say, bigoted men such as Mr. Soharwardy and Mr. Elmasry could, by simply claiming that their tender feelings were hurt, sic a government bureaucracy on a magazine, or anyone for that matter?"

This is from the article in the Globe and now Ezra has re-stated this rude defmation yet again?
Can someone, anyone, tell me why he can spew such personal defamatory statements and yet launch a lawsuit this year against Calgary's FFWD and myself for $100,000.
Why is it ok for Ezra to launch such a personal tirade and then try and stiffle my right to free speech?
Sorry, but I call that gross hypocrisy!!
How dare you Ezra say one thing yet do another.

*
"hey there says... This is no time to be attacking TVO."

calling the show "mostly mush" isn't exactly a
ferocious attack.

of course... if i've hurt your feelings... you
could complain to the hrc.

just kidding.

*

My impression is that Steve Paikin came in there prepared to be a bit more aggressive against Ezra and his perspective, but was disarmed by Ezra's reasonable answers and quick wit, and really disarmed when the panel was pretty clearly not pro-HRC.

There was a bit of Ezra bashing, but surprisingly little.

The two Muslim lawyers were occasionally off topic or incoherent, but no worse than the Catholic Civil Rights Person. If they were the face of Islam, there would be no issues.

Steve Paikin clearly is an intelligent guy - although I know his politics differ vastly from mine, I have always respected him, and I think he earned further respect today. I challenge anyone to name a Canadian TV journalist who would have done a more evenhanded job of this than Steve did.

We should reflect on how far this HRC issue has come in only 2 weeks, and be proud. The people here at SDA have been an important part of the process of airing and pushing the process along.

Thank you Kate for providing this forum. Never before have I seen the blogosphere so active in common and useful purpose as I have on this.

I wonder what the next step is? We cannot rest yet.

*
"Merle Terlesky asks... Why is it ok for Ezra to launch such a personal tirade
and then try and stiffle(sic) my right to free speech?"

merle... this was one of the more important points made... how could
you miss it?

if you feel you have been defrauded, scammed or defamed... you go before
a proper court where rules of procedure and evidence are in effect... and
you pay your own freight. if you lose you pay the other guy's costs.

syed soharwardy, on the other hand, scrawls out a complaint about hurt
feelings and without any burden of proof gets to force ezra to spend
money and time to defend himself.

to add insult to injury... the canadian taxpayer pays all the freight for the
plaintiff.

you get it now?

*

Merle Terlesky... did Ezra haul you in front of the HRC, aka kangaroo court? No. A lawsuit in a court of law, with rules of evidence is a totally different thing from a show trial in a forum without rules of evidence, without judges, etc. If you don't understand the difference, you're out of your depth in this conversation.

Merle Teresky, you make yourself altogether obscure.

What the heck are you talking about?

Please speak clearly.

TerLesky--sorry.

Come on people there are larger underlining issues here!!! These people wish to overtake the very fabric that is western civilization!! Our freedoms, our virtues our rights!!! The left is basically giving them a gold plated invitation to do so!!! Look at what is happening to France!!! There are actually areas in France that police do not enter!! (It’s ten times worse then Jane and Finch!!) Why are we all bending over and letting them give it too us without Vaseline? Because we are all fantastic CANADIANS that’s why!!! If Taliban Jack were around in the 30’s he would have let Hitler walk in to Poland uncontested and said, okay Adolph now this is the last country, alright? Don’t make us send Alexa McDonough out there to negotiate with you!! She’s a tough cookie after her second schnapps!!!

The guy from Western U. in London made the best case for protection of free speech.

I got the sense he is apprehensive of how the Supremes would handle Ezra's case (if it came to that ) or even whether thy would allow an appeal.

The woman (not a lawyer), clearly knows the downside of the HRC and the play at work, but articulating her points was a bit soft.

Ezra did well, I am looking forward to the O'Reilly Factor with Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant tomorrow for sure!!

I just hope they are alloted enough time to present a clear enough picture for a worldwide audience.

It certainly would be interesting to know what is going on in the head of poor bewildered Shirlene McGovern these days. Little did Mz McGovern know she was about to become world famous when she opened her inquisition of Ezra "the man" Levant. Just another routine day at the office she thought. Some routine day I'd say.

The theme of the panel discussion was not:
"Free speech and the HRCs"
instead it was:
"The grievances of Moslems and how to appease them."

(There were two token non-Moslems on the panel
who were there for appearances sake)

The thing I continue to find immensely interesting is that this TVO thing is the very first air time Ezra Levant has got on TV, and Mark Steyn still has no air time at all. A two-bit TVO news show that absolutely nobody watches has scooped the entire Canadian MSM on one of the most explosive stories in recent history.

Can this be explained by even the gross incompetence we've come to expect from our MSM? It is hard to overestimate the effects of sheer stupidity with these people, but this is stretching my suspension of disbelief.

Don't be fooled folks , every since CAIR/CAIR-canada and Dr.Sheema Khan have been tied to a hamas and Hezballah funding via the bogus Holy Land Foundation they Islamist/Sharia Law yahoo can only use the CRTC to threaten the CBC and TVO to force them to be allowed on to spew more vile and hate.
Many other private Media groups no longer go near Dr.Elmasry or Dr.Sheema Khan , Khan gave misleading evidence to Justice O'Connor so CAIR could bolster their "Islamophobia" campaign to impose Sharia law by-proxy .
We now see this being done at the CHRC that fear the Terrorist wing of Islam that is operating right hear in canada and using our own Charter of Rights against to punish any Canadian that tried to tell the truth about Muhammad and Islam.
Sheema Khan managed to CON people into letting her get on the Board for the Canadian Civil Liberties group which is a real farce but no surprising since even the UN let Fascist Nations sit on the Human Rights panel.

If Muslims think canadians will just lay down and hand over the Courty to these Islamofascists
Occupiers , they will be dead wrong.
Death is far better then living in a Sharia law hell hole Islamic nation if that's what canada becomes under the Current CHRC rulings that have turned the Charter into a Suicide-pact with the Whahabist Muslims like Khan and Elmasry.
Sadly , Elmasry has suckered in the Natives to think the CIC is buddy of their cause because of Palestine , but the godless natives will bethe first to be slaughtered for Allah's cause .

You see this on the Little Mosque On The Prairie .

-prospector

I'd call it 'infamous'... well at least in reasonable circles such as this one and others I frequent, mind you the lame stream media (cbc, torREDstar, etc.) will likely laud her as a victim/hero in a docu-drama of how this poor woman is a victim of everyone...wha wha wha.

"How did it come to be that rough and, I would say, bigoted men such as Mr. Soharwardy and Mr. Elmasry could, by simply claiming that their tender feelings were hurt, sic a government bureaucracy on a magazine, or anyone for that matter?"

I "DARE" Merle, :)
Mr. Shoarwardy and Mr. Elmasry are bigots to me, no doubt in my mind. Men like this are the scum of the earth in today's world.

SO what?
I AM allowed my opinions here in Canada, even it it "HURTS" your feelings.
Deal with it.

The whiners have been given rebuttal space at the Globe and Mail. I guess the G&M doesn't want to "offend" anyone.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080121.wcomment0122/CommentStory/National/home

What got me were Steve Paikin's opening salvos on Ezra Levant, where he basically asked the same question as Shirlene McGovern's opening question of Ezra: What were your intentions in publishing the Danish cartoons.

Ezra admirably answered that he was within his legal rights to do so and moved on. Is Paikin one of the thought police, too?

The other thing that kept coming up, and the best rebutter to it was Grant Huscroft, Law Professor from the U of Western Ontario, was the incitement factor in publishing the cartoons: Why when Ezra knew there were riots, mayhem, looting, burning, killing going on, on the Muslim street, did he still publish the cartoons?

The point, surely, is that Ezra Levant--and none of us here in when-last-time-I-looked strong, free, and democratic Canada--should be held responsible for what Asshats are doing half-way around the world. Suggesting that Ezra should not have published because of the lack of restraint and, frankly, the reckless irresponsiblity of self-indulgent and infantile Muslim rowdies is to suggest that blackmail works--and that it's OK.

Paikin and co. at The Agenda need to bring onto their panels some strong, articulate, non-straw wo/men to speak on the Right. Unfortunately, they probably don't know who they are or, even worse, they do and deliberately leave them out of the loop or, worse than that, the strong, articulate voices on the Right have been intimidated to such an extent at their work places, etc. that they have stopped speaking out.

This is the Canada we're presently living in, and boy, do we need help. I'll hand this to The Agenda that, alone among our "fearless and transparent" media, they have brought this issue into the open. I don't suppose it hurt that Ezra's You-Tube tapes had already had hundreds of thousands of viewers see them.

Good for The Agenda for picking up on the fact that this is "news." (sarc/off)

From my comment above: "I'll hand this to The Agenda that, alone among our "fearless and transparent" media, they have brought this issue into the open."

I mean that they are the first Canadian television news program to air this issue.

For Sean S.: Check out the recent report from George Mason University on American media political coverage. They concluded that all were biased to the left except FOX that was "perfectly balanced". Stick THAT up your preconceived notions.

For others re: the lack of media exposure, I am nursing a pet theory (it is pretty weak) that the "L"iberal media is seeing this as a Conservative ploy to entrap the CHRC. Levant, a past Conservative candidate, is fighting a valiant fight...but the Conservative government doesn't know about it? Maybe I see conspiracies where none exist, but I suspect that Ezra and PMSH may be just handing out rope to hang the HRC...and the MSM recognizes this and won't cover it.

Steve Paikin may be intelligent , but intelligence does not always translate to common sense.

Commons sens would dictate Paikin take a sympathetic view. I mean , TVO is lib-left and if the HRC thought police gain even more power , eventually the lib-left and TVO become the hunted. Sadly this does not seem to permeate the feeble lib-left mentality.

Ezra Levant knew he was "walking into a politically" correct lib-left biased interview and he did his best to dominate the interview.

Paikin tried several times to make Levant appear guilty , but failed.

... at this point I tuned out.

*Been around the Block zeroed in on ..

** What got me were Steve Paikin's opening salvos on Ezra Levant, where he basically asked the same question as Shirlene McGovern's opening question of Ezra: What were your intentions in publishing the Danish cartoons. **

The AB-HRC are professionals in this game. They have a 100% win rate, so I*ve learned.

The first thing they fish for are one*s thoughts. Thoughts are not subject to any law, yet Levant is probed for his thoughts so they can be used to hang him.

There was no special law for publishing restraint on political cartoons in effect.

The only other area of *thin ice* was the question of calling **Fire in a theater**.

The **Theatre** was Europe and the Middle East and the demonstrations, [pre-planned, BTW], was well over with.

Levant brought us a news story with the previously published cartoons and no publishing law was broken.

If Levant had added cartoons of his own making, then there may have been grounds for examination.

Otherwise, fishing for thoughts in order to *hang* someone seems unfair and unCanadian. = TG

"Being three time zones west of Ontari,ari,ari,o... with no TVO available

Does anyone know if this broadcast is likely to be up on YouTube or other systems?
Posted by: no guff at January 21, 2008 8:29 PM"

Usually within a couple of days following the broadcast, one can subscribe to or download a podcast from The Agenda, audio or video.

http://tinyurl.com/2a8qu7

' ... If Levant had added cartoons of his own making, then there may have been grounds for examination. ...
Posted by: TG at January 22, 2008 12:58 PM
..."

So TG ... in your opinion political cartoons are fair game for the HRC. Perhaps there is job for you at the HRC.

MadMacs,

Sit back with a coffee and listen to the debate here. Click the blue audio button.

tvo.org/cfmx/tvoorg/theagenda/index.cfm?page_id=7&bpn=379011&ts=2007-02-22%2005:00:00.0
====================

Brian,

Only if clearly malicious would they have had something to consider. Gettin nice folks like the KKK or Zundel is OK by me.

As it is, there were no grounds for review whatever. = TG