August 6, 2008

Now - Fire. Them. All.

The Alberta Human Rights Commission took only 900 days to grant their approval of a magazine publisher's choice of news content;

"Look at his rationale for acquitting me: because the Western Standard met Gundara’s home-made tests of reasonableness. We published the cartoons in “context”; we published letters that “criticized” them; and my favourite, the cartoons weren’t “simply stuck in the middle” of the magazine. Gundara must have thought for ten whole minutes to come up with that list of journalistic do’s and don’t’s. And – phew! – he likes me. He really likes me!

Sorry again, I don’t give a damn if he likes me. In fact, it rather creeps me out that a whole squad of teat-sucking bureaucrats spent 900 days inspecting me and the Western Standard. I positively want to offend them. In fact, that’s pretty much the only test of my freedom: can I do exactly what Gundara says I shouldn’t? I’m not interested in publishing recipes or sports scores. I’m interested in bothering the hell out of government."

(Editor's Note: The above image is reproduced here for the sole purpose of offending. No editorial value or news worthiness is intended. No letters of criticism will be published. Thank you.)

Continue reading...

Posted by Kate at August 6, 2008 2:56 PM

. . . and $500,000 wasted.

That would buy a lot of "free" health care

Posted by: Fred at August 6, 2008 3:05 PM

'Way to go, Kate!

Posted by: lookout at August 6, 2008 3:12 PM

Eventually it will be in the "middle" of your blog. Not sure what test that means you fail but that would make it a triple.....

Posted by: Stephen at August 6, 2008 3:13 PM

Why are these tribunals given any power at all?
If somebody makes a complaint against you, you should simply ignore it. If they issue a warrant or a subpoena, the rest of the community should simply surround the place and not allow anyone in or out. They only have the power that we give them and I'm all for not giving them any.

Posted by: Edward Teach at August 6, 2008 3:32 PM

I don't know, Kate, you should have made those images much, much bigger. The offending is directly proportionate to the size of the "cartoon", in my opinion!

Posted by: Alberta Girl at August 6, 2008 3:36 PM

this is the jihadhaha of the day. HRC and most of the mussi's are a joke.

Posted by: cal2 at August 6, 2008 3:42 PM

Edward Teach, that's a nice idea but it doesn't fly. The HRCs have coercive powers and can punish non compliance. (Heck, they even punish compliance!)

Why are they given any power at all? Because they're agents of the state (instituted via Trudeau's Charter), which are a gravy train for Liberal, PC hangers-on and a means to keep the populace in check. That's why.

Posted by: lookout at August 6, 2008 3:47 PM

I like those neat cartoons you've posted. They look highly offensive and I can see no redeeming social or artistic value to them. Nor is there any context to them. Having viewed them I am starting to feel hatred and an uncontrollable urge to do something discriminatory to an identifiable group.

Posted by: DrDave at August 6, 2008 3:58 PM

Is the HRC feeling a little bit nude today?

thank you Kate.

Fire. Them. All.

Posted by: marc in calgary at August 6, 2008 4:05 PM

No, no, no, Dr. Dave. The criterion for Section 13 of the Human Rights Act is not actuality -ie, your declaration that you are actually feeling hatred or contempt for an identifiable group.

The criterion rests in the realm of potentiality. Not the real actual world. The act is quite clear; the wording states: ' any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.'

Got that? Not ACTUALLY results in someone feeling hatred towards so and so. But a speech that might possibly 'expose' that person to someone else, not necessarily you, the speaker/writer, who feels 'hatred or contempt' to...

Not necessarily expose.
Not actually expose.
Just possibly.

And what does 'exposure' mean?

If you identify a group as radical (eg Islamic fascism), then, does this count as a violation of Section 13, because you exposed that group of Islamic fascists to hatred or contempt? Does that mean that we can't hate or view with contempt such terrorist groups?

And who defines feelings of hatred or contempt? What if so and so is viewed with hatred or contempt, not because he's identifiable as a member of a 'distinct group' but because he actually is, a hateful and contemptible individual all by his lonesome self?

And why the heck can't we feel and view people with hatred or contempt?

These pompous arrogant brain-dead bureaucrats, with their sense of elitist superiority - how they have the nerve to assume authority over the rest of the population. Are we peasants? To the Liberal/socialist mindset - yes, we are. To be ruled by Them.

Do you know what this type of governance is? It's totalitarian. Read Popper's The Open Society...and you'll see that the devt of an elitist set of 'philosopher-kings' is the very essence of such totalitarianism.


Posted by: ET at August 6, 2008 4:14 PM

After reading Ezra's response to his "acquital", I just had to express my admiration for his intellect and character. He is truly an inspiration, someone in whom all Canadians can take pride.

Posted by: RSP at August 6, 2008 4:16 PM

Are HRC employees an identifiable group?

I guess I'd better be careful with what I say then.

Posted by: C_Miner at August 6, 2008 4:21 PM



So, Ezra and the now-defunct Western Standard are out $100,000, the Alberta taxpayers have feathered the nests of 15 bureaucrats to the tune of $500,000, and Mr. Gundara, the sucking-at-the-teat-government flunkie, whose decision matters, has given his approval of the publishing of the Danish cartoons AFTER 900 DAYS--or, as Ezra puts it, his being in the dock for 900 days--and Ezra's supposed to be grateful and consider this a win?


Something's so rotten in the state of Canuckistan it's not funny.

As I said earlier: FIRE. THEM. ALL.



The True North Strong and Free is now a joke.

How about the Careening Compass of Appeasement and Dhimmitude?

Posted by: batb at August 6, 2008 4:21 PM

Oh, and I forgot to mention that after Ezra and the Western Standard are $100,000 in the red and the Alberta taxpayers have shelled out $500,000 for this case, neither Muslim group who brought these charges to the AHRC are out one penny.


Something stinks to high heaven.


Posted by: batb at August 6, 2008 4:26 PM

In his report, Gundara presents as “fact” his personal opinion of the Muhammad cartoons. He says they’re “stereotypical, negative and offensive.”

I agreed with Ezra's analysis. I read the entire report including Gundara's comments. I had the same feeling as Ezra did as I read it. I did not mind the “stereotypical, negative and offensive” comment because I thought it was true. I simply thought that Gundara should have accompanied his comments with something like "but they went no further in satire than what has become commonplace in Canadian cartoons". Gundara made no such comment.

He did talk about the context of the cartoons being included in an article about free speech and that is why the complaint was dismissed. While he did not actually say that the cartoons would have constituted hatred had they been simply published in the same manner as other satirical carttons, he did not deny it either. It was this omission that bothered me second most.

And, of course, the main question and what bothered me most is why should he even have the authority to rule on such a question?

Posted by: Brent Weston at August 6, 2008 4:36 PM

I suspect Stephen Harper's staff and insiders are well aware of the Ezra Levant Alberta - HRC saga, and but for a few CPC MP's are totally silent, as are the Canadian corrupt Canadian MSM on this issue.

Thanks Kate for keeping Canadians up to date on an issue the corrupt MSM will not touch.

Posted by: Joseph ( Joe ) Molnar at August 6, 2008 4:43 PM

Maybe it is time to run a Canada-wide contest to see who can draw the most offensive cartoon.

Posted by: wallyj at August 6, 2008 4:43 PM

I want to make this very clear.

I am 100% in favour of safe tattooing in prisons.

I am 100% against taxpayer funding of tattooing in prisons or anywhere else.

Don't come whining to me with your fatuous, pusillanimous demands, you morons.


Posted by: jlc at August 6, 2008 4:48 PM

Brent Weston says that he finds the cartoons in question "stereotypical, negative and offensive".

Really? An explanation, please.

(I find--and found--them nothing of the sort.)

Joe, I highly recommend visiting Ezra Levant's blog daily for a really splendid analysis of the HRC situation.

I think we're winning, but we're a long way from the finish line.

Posted by: lookout at August 6, 2008 4:50 PM

ET i totaly agree & i have said it many a time on here that We have become a totalitarian society, Thanks to a past PM that rode around Montreal with his Nazi helmet on during the war.
The problem with Fire Them All is that the liberal mindset has put these Elites in position's of power & if you could Fire them they would have the Governments in court for wrongfull dismissals & they would again recieve their entitlements(in their minds) courtesy of you & me & every law biding taxpayer of Canada.
The liberal Socialist machine of the past has infiltrated every nook & cranny in this country. Also they had & i believe, still may have a deadly propaganda machine. Trudeau learned well from the Nazi Propaganda of 20's,30's in order to control the thoughts of canadians.

Posted by: bryanr at August 6, 2008 4:59 PM

Hey Kate,let us know if you get any death threats over the cartoons.

I was thinking of putting cartoons of Mohamed on a Teeshirt and walking around outside a nearby mosque with a video camera and recording death threats and threats of bodily harm being made against me.

That way I have a good and legitimate reason to start carrying a handgun for protection in Toronto,yee-hah!


*** Important Note to Self ***

In the future,do not post crazy ideas about carrying guns in public on an internet website most likely being monitored by the Authorities.

Posted by: Mr.g at August 6, 2008 5:13 PM

Lefty blogger wants Ezra to be Canada's Theo Van Gogh...

"Still waiting for a fatwa to be placed on Levant's head. Desperately wanting to be Canada's version of Theo van Gogh and Pim Fortuyn.

Posted by Mushroom | 1:52 PM, August 06, 2008 "

Posted by: Tuco at August 6, 2008 5:24 PM

bren weston - a cartoon, or image, or statement about the common attributes of a group or collective must be reductionist, ie, stereotypical. That's its purpose - to define the group collective within one attribute.

Now, if you are moving into cartoon critiques of political behaviour, then, you are even more selective.

So, visualizing political Islam as fundamentalist and violent, is factual. As for its being 'negative' - well, facts are facts. That includes critical or negative facts. Offensive? To define violence as violence? Again, it's a fact.

How can cartoons constitute hatred? Is criticism of behaviour, in this case, fundamentalist violent terrorism - is this an act of hatred? I would hope so; I hope that our political cartoonists don't approve of terrorism.

Again, the basic fact - is that our govt has no right to oversee our speech. Freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Period.

Posted by: ET at August 6, 2008 5:35 PM

An explanation, please.

Sure, lookout. A reasonable request. Upon examining my own post, I do see an ambiguity. I did not mean a personal opinion (i.e. you stated "...that he finds..."); I simply meant that it is true (I used "true") that some will find them that way.

Additionally, you did not ask for a personal opinion, but I will give it as a bonus. Actually, I thought the cartoons were of rather low quality, both in terms of their artistic and their comedic value. I confess to not even "getting" the joke in several of them. However, I did find one of them humourous. I did and do get a chuckle out of the "we've run out of virgins" cartoon. It is the mark of a good cartoonist that he can make his reader chuckle upon a reread of his cartoon.

Posted by: Brent Weston at August 6, 2008 5:42 PM

Cc: to ET on my 5:42 post

Posted by: Brent Weston at August 6, 2008 5:47 PM

It sure must be galling for Ezra to have some bureaucrat named "Pardeep Gundara" telling him what is or isn't acceptable to publish in his own magazine. An immigrant/refugee from some South Asian hellhole who got his/her (who can tell?) cushy government job through affimative action deigns to tell Canadians what they are allowed to read.

Fire and deport them all.

Posted by: JP at August 6, 2008 5:54 PM

Brent Weston, I appreciate your response.

That some found these innocuous cartoons offensive tells far more about their “cry-baby” sensibilities than the actual content. E.g., Apparently, some Muslims say that NO representation of Mohammed is allowed. Therefore, even the most benign representation, which would describe most of the cartoons, would be offensive.

In fact, I believe that the original contest was devised to see what would happen if the prophet were represented. We sure found out—and I blame the Muslim rabble rousers for the mess, not the cartoonists or those who published the cartoons. (How about dignifying Muslims with the expectation that they might behave like adults who can exercise self-control? Letting them off the hook all the time is, IMO, treating them with disdain.)

Re the troubles about the cartoons: as far as I know, they were instigated by activist imams, who actually inserted two really offensive—but allowable, if free speech means anything—cartoons into the mix. I have no respect at all for such POLITICAL operatives, who caused—yes, they’re the ones responsible—the deaths of many.

So, once again, kudos to Kate for thumbing her nose at such people, including the dolts who run our HRCs.

Posted by: lookout at August 6, 2008 6:31 PM

Stephen Harper re the HRC

"will no one rid us of these meddlesome beasts?"

Posted by: cal2 at August 6, 2008 6:44 PM

And lookout - the rule that you can't make images of Mohammed has to apply only to Muslims. After all, do Muslims expect to be asked to obey the rules of Judaism? Christianity? Hinduism? No.

So, the attitude of some Muslims that all peoples must obey Islamic religious rules is arrogant and untenable.

Posted by: ET at August 6, 2008 6:45 PM


It would be just as galling if that bureaucrat could trace his lineage back 400 years to Europe. It would just as galling if the bureaucrat was a recently arrived alien from Alpha Centauri. The original complaint was galling, the interrogation was galling and the reasoning is galling. Period.

Posted by: Kathryn at August 6, 2008 6:48 PM

Go, Ezra!!!

Posted by: Louise at August 6, 2008 6:51 PM

Last week, I had to decline ANOTHER telephone request from the CPC for donations...and explain AGAIN why. I wonder how many others have cut off funding due to the HRC issue? When will the CPC get a clue? When will PMSH act?

They won't get another cent from me until I hear the PM or Justice Minister speak in no uncertain terms against the egregious actions of the HRC.

Posted by: Eeyore at August 6, 2008 6:53 PM

Has anyone seen a list of MPs that have weighed-in on the HRC issue? It's time to prod some of the unenlightened ones.

Posted by: glasnost at August 6, 2008 6:53 PM

Kate, you need to name that dead gopher up at the top.

I say you photoshop a little turban on him, stick a little AK47 in his little dead gopher mitt and call him... wait for it...

...naw, can't do it. I don't want to get hauled in front of the BC/Ontario/Whatever HRC tribunal. I don't have $200k hanging out my back pocket this week.

But hey, this was probably enough to get me hated by Keith Olberman and every Lefty this side of the Arctic circle. I'm good with that.

Posted by: The Phantom at August 6, 2008 6:59 PM

If every newspaper and magazine had republished the cartoons, the whole Islamofascist world would have had a good reality check. As it is, they got emboldened by the number of people who quaked with fear and ran to hide.

The feeding of the frenzy by showing that the strategy of terrorism works has to stop.

Way to go Ezra and Kate.

Posted by: Kyla at August 6, 2008 7:00 PM

Here is a link to some images of the cartoons that are easier to view than the one at the top of this article.

Posted by: Brent Weston at August 6, 2008 7:10 PM

I am really really offended...I have some cartoons of all ah and mo Ham (as is Pig ham) id, sexually arousing themselves with other men and goats..on my wall near my computer...and I listen to the great videos from nose on your face while I look at them...mouthing uck aelia...a needed comic relief after reading about all the atrosities committed by islamists around the world.

Posted by: cosmos at August 6, 2008 7:34 PM

I can't recall the last time that I so badly wanted such a catch phrase on a t-shirt -




Posted by: Kai Wolf at August 6, 2008 8:07 PM

I wonder how many "Nobodies" the HRCs across Canada have dragged and persecuted in the name of tolerance and diversity- spit flies.

Bravo Kate for posting the pictures, I'm not a Muslim nor shall I ever be one. What insults them makes me laugh, there is no place in Canadian Society for Sharia Law now or ever. Once the Political Islamists get that message they either assimilate into Canadian Culture or get out of Canada. There's no room in Canada for Wahhabi 9th Century culture or laws.

Posted by: Rose at August 6, 2008 8:22 PM

Bravo indeed!

Note the absence of the 'progressive' voices on this...

Posted by: ldd at August 6, 2008 8:55 PM

To think that working people making$12/hr actually have to pay their salaries, disgusting and shameful,i for one am glad there is a judgement day coming,they will get theirs.

Posted by: doug at August 6, 2008 9:04 PM

Last week, I had to decline ANOTHER telephone request from the CPC for donations...and explain AGAIN why. I wonder how many others have cut off funding due to the HRC issue? When will the CPC get a clue? When will PMSH act?

They won't get another cent from me until I hear the PM or Justice Minister speak in no uncertain terms against the egregious actions of the HRC.

Posted by: Eeyore at 6:53 PM


I went one step further and told the lady that I might even campaign against them if they kept ignoring this mess of the HRCs.

She responed with an, Oh!!!!

Posted by: GYM at August 6, 2008 9:04 PM

lets make it even. muslims are invited to view and comment.

Posted by: cal2 at August 6, 2008 9:05 PM

I have also witheld funding to the CPC. I just can't figure out who will get my support now.

Posted by: Hoarfrost at August 6, 2008 9:19 PM

Bravo indeed!

Note the absence of the 'progressive' voices on this...

Posted by: ldd at August 6, 2008 8:55 PM
Yes, noted! And where the heck is Isam or one of his incarnations?

If there must be HRC's, why aren't the names and CREDENTIALS of the commissioners published anywhere? I recognize a couple of the names of the AHRC and KNOW that they have no specialized education or expertise beyond having memorized the act. And connections - they have those.

If you look at most of the decisions published in the last 3 or 4 years, these guys are largely in the business of deciding workers' compensation claims and employment standards disputes and we already have agencies that do that!

Posted by: Seachange at August 6, 2008 10:18 PM

I also received a phone call from the CPC asking for donations. I told them all available funds were going to these court cases. If enough of us tell them maybe they will do something about these Kangaroo courts. Told them also if the matter was cleared up by April then I will donate - if not - oh well. Seems I read where the Conservatives were a little down in the donation dept. recently.

Posted by: dolly at August 6, 2008 10:20 PM

glasnost: "Has anyone seen a list of MPs that have weighed-in on the HRC issue? It's time to prod some of the unenlightened ones."
FYI I wrote my MP (Conservative Party) about this and in his reply of about a month ago he said:

" colleague, Mr. Rick Dykstra (MP St. Catharines), tabled a motion to have the Standing Committee on Justice and Humand Rights investigate the CHRC. The table would call for the Standing Committee to look into issues such as the CHRC's mandate, operations, and its application and interpretation of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Because the DHRC operates at arm's length from the government and reports to Parliament, it makes sense that a parliamentary committee would undertake this study. Once a thorough review has been conducted, the committee will report its findings to Parliament."

I don't know beans about parliamentary procedure, so I don't know if merely by tabling a motion the ball is now rolling, but it sure wouldn't hurt if you all wrote letters to your MPs to make sure this doesn't die, especially if there is an election called this fall.

Posted by: Louise at August 6, 2008 10:25 PM

When will PMSH act?

Isn't it about time that the Conservatives collectively wrap their hands around this sordid issue? It seems long overdue. FOX news had a segment a couple days ago re-capping Mark Steyn and the Alberta HRC. It painted a very negative picture of Canada. Aren't they noticing?

Pardeep Gundara is just a symptom of the unelected and unaccountable bureaucratic lackeys that socialists seed where they can. His minority status made him a desirable point man, no matter that he obviously isn't rooted in Canada's long political culture of free speech.

Posted by: penny at August 6, 2008 10:25 PM

I write a lot of letters to the papers, political parties, councillors and MPPs and have had several letters published. Every political party has responded to my letters save one, the Conservative Party. I have sent them written letters, emails, talked to canvassers and contacted them through their website and not a peep from them.

As many of you have noted they are always on the phone or asking for money through the mail yet it seems to be a one way communication. What is the problem with our party and why will they not communicate with us. It ticks me off as I am a paid up member of the party and worked on many of their campaigns.

No more money or help until they respond to my request for their position on the HRCs.

Posted by: Dave at August 6, 2008 10:29 PM

eyeore: I also have cut off funding and I was a regular suscriber. I to this date have no acknowledgement that what I have done is in any way significant to my contributions.Please tell me how can I possibly impact the Conservative party or any of my "so called representives" if by withdrawing my regular funding has no impact? I would truly like an answer to this dilemma. Thanks Eliza

Posted by: eliza at August 6, 2008 10:40 PM

It might interest you to know that 100% of those charged under section 13 of the CHRC mandate are white.

Nearly the entire HRCs are staffed with women and minorities.

Go figure.

Posted by: John V at August 6, 2008 10:50 PM

"When will PMSH act?"


Harper is acting. He is acting like a Liberal.

Posted by: John V at August 6, 2008 10:54 PM

I forgot a word.

It might interest you to know that 100% of those charged under section 13 of the CHRC mandate are white MEN!

Posted by: John V at August 6, 2008 10:56 PM

Bravo Kate!! I absolutely love the editors note, although we may need to be hitting those Paypal buttons again soon...or maybe not. The crybabies have gotten a good public spanking so maybe they'll SHUDDUP for a while.

Posted by: kelly at August 6, 2008 11:00 PM

To Rose; you were wondering about the 'no names' dragged before the HRC across the country. Actually these are public entities and their case files are open for review. At least what they have published. You will notice an indordinate number of Nazi types were getting drawn up before the commissions. Actually most of the accused did not show up. Gotta hand it to them for their principles. This has been going on for years where the public dredges were the first targetted and then the HRC moved closer to mainstream as they were emboldened by the collective silence. A bit of irony that the Neo Nazi were tagged with the tactics used by their National Socialist forefathers. Not that that excuses the activity of the HRC in one whit.

Posted by: Farmerboy at August 6, 2008 11:19 PM

Last week, I had to decline ANOTHER telephone request from the CPC for donations...and explain AGAIN why. I wonder how many others have cut off funding due to the HRC issue? When will the CPC get a clue? When will PMSH act?

They won't get another cent from me until I hear the PM or Justice Minister speak in no uncertain terms against the egregious actions of the HRC.

Posted by: Eeyore at 6:53 PM


I went one step further and told the lady that I might even campaign against them if they kept ignoring this mess of the HRCs.

She responed with an, Oh!!!!

I told them the same and that I would even be a $1000 donator, seeing it would only really cost me 250, if only the CPC would start leading on this. They haven't called back since end of May.

Kate, loved the editor's note. Glad you are back.

Posted by: Glenn at August 6, 2008 11:39 PM

Anyone know a tattoist who'd do Moh doing a pig.

Just curious....

Posted by: eastern paul at August 7, 2008 12:54 AM

Just seeing one the these self-righteous swine defending their arrogant behaviour produces a feeling that borders on rage. There was a recent program on TV that showed the head of the Alberta HRC on a panel with Ezra, Steyn and one other fellow. Disgusting little weasel of a beaurocrat.

"There is nothing in the world more dangerous than a stupid man with ambition."


Posted by: Pat at August 7, 2008 1:41 AM

This evil machine has got to go, no if an's or buts.

Posted by: Revnant Dream at August 7, 2008 1:47 AM

And then , because there was no one left, they came for me.
Fire. Them. ALL!

Posted by: Snowbunnie at August 7, 2008 1:59 AM

"Last week, I had to decline ANOTHER telephone request from the CPC for donations...and explain AGAIN why. I wonder how many others have cut off funding due to the HRC issue? When will the CPC get a clue? When will PMSH act?

They won't get another cent from me until I hear the PM or Justice Minister speak in no uncertain terms against the egregious actions of the HRC.
Posted by: Eeyore at August 6, 2008 6:53 PM"

Eeyore, I got a similar call from the local CPC fundraiser, and made a similar response. The caller (male) at least had the honesty to say that mine was not the first such response he'd had, and that the CPC was in fact getting the message. So I'm holding out some hope that this is sinking in to the Conservative gray matter.

And if it comes to an election, well yes, I will support them, because the alternatives are unthinkable.

Posted by: gordinkneehill at August 7, 2008 3:15 AM

Here's my blasphemous take on Mohammed (all are brazenly stolen from

but I put them here saying that if I had any artistic ability, I would draw them just the same.

Muhammad (((:~{>

Muhammad playing Little Orphan Annie (((8~{>

Muhammad as a pirate (((P~{>

Muhammad as Moshe Dayan (((P~{>

Muhammad on a bad turban day ))):~{>

Muhammad with sand in his eye(((;~{>

Muhammad wearing sunglasses (((B~{>

Muhammad giving the raspberry. (((:~{>

Giving Muhammad the raspberry. ;-P

Mohammad with a lit bomb in his turban *-O)):~{>

Mohammad with a lit bomb in his turban *~@:~{>

Mohammed, full of booze and pork, pukes up Allah (((:~Oالله

Intoxicated Mohammed (((‡o{Þ

High Mohammed ((( ¦o) >

The devil mo ]:~{>

Sombrero Mohommed ⊂∫≡(:~{>>

Mohammed with a bomb in his turban. *@(((:~{>>

Mohammed with a nuclear bomb in his turban. @=(((:~{>

Carmen Miranda Mohammed ڨڭڿۺ((:~{>

Muhammed without beard O:-|

Muhammed without beard; or Jesus O :-)

Muhammed having a vision) O 8-)

Muhammed with goatee) O:-)*

Muhammad pissed off that his favourite goat ran away (((B-|>

Muhammad being shot by Starship Enterprise =-o * * * (((:~{>

Mohammed with a lit fuse coming out of his turban *-(((:~{>

Mohammed on a *really* bad turban day )8(:~{>

PS - I am not racist towards people but I sure as hell am prejudiced against attitudes!

Posted by: Frenchie77 at August 7, 2008 4:30 AM

the conservatives or mr harper will do nothing about hrcs. they are basically liberals and do not really think there is anything wrong with telling you what you can or cannot say. i withdrew any support for them years ago.

Posted by: old white guy at August 7, 2008 6:03 AM

Frenchie77, clever and funny--at least I thought so. Thanks for the morning smile!

Posted by: lookout at August 7, 2008 6:40 AM

C'mon, can't you just imagine the deluge of condemnations if Harper were to shut down anything with Human Rights in it's moniker? All of the media would be in a state of rancor the likes of which we've never seen.
They should be shut down, they don't belong in a democratic society. When the time is right, they will be. It's up to the electorate to create the right time. Same goes for CBC Pravda.

Posted by: Liz J at August 7, 2008 8:12 AM

So, Kate, has the HRC been knocking at your door yet?

Posted by: batb at August 7, 2008 8:56 AM

It's up to the electorate to create the right time. Same goes for CBC Pravda.

Send a letter to the editor or make a chrc hating

since I'm what kinsella would call a hater, etc I'd just like to say this hater thinks Ezra rocks,

How many doctors could we have hired for what the CHRC wasted.

PS Fire them all.

Posted by: dinosaur at August 7, 2008 10:46 AM

Well, the CPC got somewhat back in my good books when they declared a parliamentary inquiry into the CHRC. But that was what, months ago? Right now they are on probabation as far as my voting intentions. As far as donating? LOL. Not a chance. With no action for months on the tribunal file, and the bribe money they are giving to Bombardier, they need to clean up their act first.

Posted by: Faramir at August 7, 2008 11:27 AM

LizJ -"C'mon, can't you just imagine the deluge of condemnations if Harper were to shut down anything with Human Rights in it's moniker? All of the media would be in a state of rancor the likes of which we've never seen."

It's long past the time for MSM to condemn the HRC's and how the HRC's embody bureaucratic state enabled corruption in Canada.
For if MSM cannot fathom the corrupt operational procedures taking place in Canadian HRC's then the MSM is just simply corrupt in their very essence as the presently constituted HRC's - Federal AND Provincial!

This is a fight for the soul of this country and is not a left or right ideology issue.
Wake up Corporate MSM and, particularly for that matter, Stephen Harper!!

Posted by: Joe Molnar at August 7, 2008 11:52 AM

Add my name to the list of commenters who have turned down CPC calls for donations due to the HRC mess.

I also emailed Rob Nicholson and got a reply saying that the HRC's are arms length organizations over which the government has no control.

That may be so, but the government could pass a law stating that any complainant to the HRC's must pay the defendent's legal costs if unsuccessful.

I think the number of complaints would fall off dramatically.

Oh, and for those that say the CPC's are in minority so they would never get that law through parliament, just make it a confidence motion and chicken s**t Dion would be sure to support it.

Posted by: clair voyant at August 7, 2008 12:28 PM

"They should be shut down, they don't belong in a democratic society."

Liz J, That's exactly the tactic the government should take to shut them down. These kangaroo courts violate democracy - due process, rules of evidence, anything resembling speedy trials, presumption of innocence, well, we all know that list.

Their dismantling, or at least abolition of the hate crime provisions, can easily be framed as a positive move and would be a no-brainer to defend. Why they haven't so is more than troubling.

Posted by: Kathryn at August 7, 2008 12:36 PM

Although “fire them all” and “shut them down” have a satisfying ring, it’s not likely to happen now or anytime.
I’ll settle for the inevitable major overhaul of the legislation. After all there’s nothing so delightfully pathetic as a liberal without power.

Posted by: glasnost at August 7, 2008 1:19 PM

Kathryn, I agree with you. The general absence of action on the part of the CPC re this crucial issue is most disturbing.

PMSH is a master strategist: I truly believe he could pitch this issue in a most positive light—if he wanted to.

There was a time when I supported the silence of the PM, while law abiding citizens were being manhandled by the state—on his watch. That time is now past. An analogy: PMSH stands by, lifebuoy in hand, and watches someone drown. Not on in my book.

And I've been a real Stephen Harper fan and cheerleader for years, and voted for him in the leadership race because I discerned that he was a man of principle. His silence now has totally undermined the confidence in his integrity I used to have. Saying this makes me feel very sad, but I can’t avoid that conclusion.

The countless, asking-for-$$ letters I get, as a card carrying Conservative, go unopened—and will continue to until I can trust this group of politicians to do the right thing. E.g., On the Israel file, PMSH has done so over and over again—hoping for new votes from the Jewish community. Meanwhile, he seems willing to play Russian Roulette with the loyal voters who put him in power, in the first place. Not a good idea and, more to the point, not a JUST idea, either.

With due respect, sir, smarten up.

P.S. I’ll still VOTE Conservative because the alternative is too awful to contemplate. But my bucks now go to Ezra and Kate.

Posted by: lookout at August 7, 2008 1:24 PM
SDA COMMENTER: "I can't recall the last time that I so badly wanted such a catch phrase on a t-shirt"

Posted by: Binks, Webelf at August 7, 2008 1:50 PM

dinaosaur, i am a prolific writer to those in charge inspite of my normally brief comments. guess what? no matter how much time you spend in composition and how good you are you are pissing in the wind.

Posted by: old white guy at August 7, 2008 2:29 PM

"I have also withheld funding to the CPC. I just can't figure out who will get my support now."

That's easy. The Liberals will get it, just as "principled" Republicans who refuse to vote for McCain are effectively voting for Obama.

I feel the same anger towards Harper and the CPC over this that you do. But do you honestly think handing the country back to the Liberals is going to move us in the right direction?

Posted by: Darrell at August 7, 2008 2:41 PM

This is the issue of our times
The HRC's and their lib/socialist supporters are actively protecting the evil Sharia creep and muslim terrorism into our country by extinguishing our greatest freedom; that of thought and speech.
A trifling bit for us all to pay to have career bureaucrats staking their claims and building their kingdoms. (hello Barb Ban Barenaked Ladies Hall)

The MSM won't touch this issue until the liberal party of Canada gives them the script that they will dutifully read aloud to us verbatim.
The MSM will degrade the issue into a "gothca" moment against all conservatives.
That's what they do.
(remember Bob-Knuck-Knuck-Knuckledragger-Fife)

Harper won't touch it because the script will then be written.
As soon as Harper says he's for it or against it, or that he will deal with it in any way, the libs will line up on the other side and the marching orders will be dictated by the likes of Iggy and Boob Rae to the MSM.

Carbon Shaft isn't working out like Dion wanted, so the HRC's will be the issue that the socialists like IGGY (Hawvaad Human Rights Professor), and Boob Rae (Rhodes scholar socialist) will go to WAR over.

Burn it down; the HRC's are totalitarian; and wielded by the likes of Barb Hall and useful idiots like Pardeep Gunduret it is directly stepping into the tracks laid down before us by Nazi's 70 years ago.

I'm hoping Harper makes it an election issue, and comes directly at them both guns blazing it is not an issue that the typical Joe Canuck can not easily understand.
Harper should take this opportunity to define this issue before CTV BellGlobe Media, the CBC and the rest of the Toronto socialists further do.
He could tie it to the massive gubmint overspending and crippling taxes that remove our freedoms and waste our money. This issue could drive a stake through the heart of the PC cloistered UN libtard crooks that think they can push us further into the Trudopian socialist gulag.

Posted by: richfisher at August 7, 2008 3:10 PM

Far be it for me to tell someone where to send their donations that were intended for the CPC, but if you believe in your freedoms - one being freedom of speech, why not donate to that cause.

It doesn't make sense to me to vote NDP or Liberal if you are worried about your freedoms.

Posted by: dolly at August 7, 2008 3:22 PM

You go girl. Freedom - Freedom - Freedom. This is the message the Kate has the balls to proclaim. Stand by her, support her, protect her!

Posted by: Jim O'Brien at August 7, 2008 7:46 PM

I miss guys like Chretien who were in it just for the fun of it.

Posted by: h.ryan at August 7, 2008 7:54 PM

Prophet Mohamad Peace be upon him
is not going to damage over you nickle head
are talking bad about him

who ever love GOD and bleive god
they must like Prophet Mohamad

plus bad publicty you made it and good publicity
taht Muslim and majority of people made
for prophet Mohamd it caused
more fame to prophet moahamd

none of thos cartoon has meaning and never this are defame Muslim
Islam is now every body today main
media buzz topic

becase they get more interested about Islam

while you can not jduge Isalm only for any number people are bad as negative
but majority of Muslim are good people
and found more trustable people hired
in very good and high job recently

the picture of cartoon called " Mohamad"

is more to me picture of
Russian soludre wear big russian animal
made big hat
and mostash and beard is more like the style of
east Europe

why I say it NO body ever draw picture of
prophet mohamad
most people who saw him discribe him
as similar face like his cousin

ALI and as I look at picture of "ALI "
I now noticed the eybrow is not too hairy
adn face is not fat puffy face in chick
and shape isnot like muslim shape figure

this ismore like one Jewish man russian wear
a big hat to blow it up to some group
but the hate did not show any thing blow up
becuase two word Allah and Mohamad written
in arabic in hat of the man saved him to
and majic this never did blow up but those names save the jewish guy and bring to Islam
as we did heard Canada Jewish congress recently become Muslim

The picture is not Muslim picuter more look
like Jewish picture to me

even bad puitlicty of you made Muslim are more famous it did not work sorry we won you lost
sorry Mr. Ezra illegal discrimination that is by your law not with Islam law then change yourslef

I met few jewish men in Canada in University
they eat alot and they were overweight so fat and so bad dress and so bad look never comb the hair with big nose look like Ezra Levant but talk kindly to me and they were extemly smart but talk with calm way Ezra talk more nevervous hyper way .
WHen I tried to know them well during few years while my first impression they do not look smart look more nurd to me but thier woamn Jewish are more look like Canadain white kind of group close to that kind woman culture but Jewish man are not change they do not act like Candian white kind of group you know with their behivour they are Jewish and pt thier big nose in Muslim shoes. Jewish has specail culture

for my own reason if I want to go to hospital I donot trust Jewish doctore to check me I donot trust their view may say with hate not real opinon after Ezra published that picture

since case of Ezra is almost finishe
Muslim get more famous we forgive him do not repeat again please

every body said prophet mohamd has nice face
short and skiny man this picture eat so much meat more east European face to me
prophet Mohamad was not ugly look like Jewish
Ezra Levant we can not expec too much from jewish
and chrisitna Jewish are two times ignorant
and chrisitian are one time ignoring
prophet of god because Jewish even deny jesus too

I do not know why chrisitan like Jewih more than Muslim while Mulsim are closer and agre with their prophet Jeses is accetable by Muslim

Posted by: Mohamad-had-nice-face at August 8, 2008 12:11 AM

As a person who has once seen a Qur'an for a few seconds in a book store and briefly pondered opening it, I am deeply offended, Kate.

Well done.

Posted by: Christoph at August 8, 2008 1:04 AM

Islam and Muslim even didnot put real picture
of Prophet mohamd with real purpose
but it said he was similar than Hazra ALi
whos Ali ( ra) was his cousin

again this is not exact face of Ali (ra) too but similar they said

similar photo of hazrat Ali( ra) but not exactly

THe photo of Imam Ali(r.a) or Hazrat Ali( ra)

it said similar to photo of Prophet mohamad

but purposly prophet Mohamad did not
like her picture become symbol
like other prophet as used
for his image but also his mission and his word
of Quran was imported

but who ever saw him said he has like beautiful face like light


The Sayings of Hadrat Ali
words of Imam Ali Some of these are:

Fear God and you will have no cause to fear anyone.
Resignation to the Will of God is the cure for the disease of the heart.
The Word of God is the medicine of the heart.
Lead such a life that when you die people will mourn you, and while you are alive they long for your company.
The days of your life pass away like clouds, so do good while you are alive.
Of all follies, the greatest is to love the world.
Opportunity is swift of flight, but slow to return.
The most happy is he to whom God has given a good wife.
He who knows himself knows God.
Do not sell your conscience for anything but heaven.
The disease of the heart is worse than the disease of the body.
To fight against one's desires is the greatest of all fights.
The strongest among you is he who subdues himself.

Posted by: mohamad-had-nice-face at August 8, 2008 1:44 AM


was that as described by his nine year old wife as the old boy jumped her?

Posted by: cal2 at August 8, 2008 6:07 AM

New name to skip over; Hi.
How would you know he had a nice face , unless you looked at picture of the reprobate and admired his physical flesh, wouldn't that make you an apostate.
What's Moe say the punishment for apostates is again?

Posted by: richfisher at August 8, 2008 12:46 PM

Roger wonders why Christians like Jews more than muslims.

Let me think... Could it have something to do with the fact that not many Jews have been murdering us lately?

Posted by: dp at August 10, 2008 12:51 AM

because you give the Jews to go and kill us Muslim lately
but do not foreget history may repeat

west give this big weapon in handof too many people in past and then this weapne back to your face liek Ben Ladne or Sadma was firs give them weapon by west to go and kill Muslim neighbor
wen all thing went wrong and you order them
they did not stop

now you order jewihs to stop and give their land back and they arenot obey orderof west any more these jewish becarfull do not give weapne inhand of any one

plus you are ridiculs you start the fire
don't you remember that?
west in 9/11 blow their own buiding by weapen you giv to hand of west soldure andthis weapn back to you this time

therefore be fair when you are talk history and facts

we never look prophet face for physcial attractivness it is matter of his face was look like light

we are not miss canada or miss usa or miss England to watch people face and body for sexsuality of it but we can distingusih
beauty and beast and different of holly or horry or evil face here

Posted by: mos at August 10, 2008 1:30 AM