“This isn’t the first time we’ve heard of defamation threats from Soharwardy. When I criticized him last month, he had his lawyer fire off a defamation threat to me; (…) I haven’t heard back from him since. I’m not looking for more lawsuits right now, but it would have been a bonanza to take Soharwardy through an examination for discovery, where the phrases ‘no comment’ or ‘that’s confidential’ or ‘you’re a hatemonger’ don’t hold up. Imagine what one would find sifting through his mosque’s financial records.
“Besides his trademark bullshit, there is something troubling about his press release. Did the Alberta Human Rights Commission truly dismiss the complaint of the dissident women in his mosque…?”
(…)
“I’ve read 50 Alberta HRC rulings, and probably 50 others from other HRCs. I cannot recall a single case in which the respondent to a complaint was a minority, let alone a radical Muslim fundamentalist like Soharwardy. I don’t think it’s because radical Muslims like Soharwardy are in compliance with the politically correct codes of HRCs. I think, at least in part, it’s because the staff at HRCs subscribe to the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations’. Like so much of the media, they excuse conduct on behalf of tin-pot fascists like Soharwardy and Mohamed Elmasry that they would prosecute if those men were Canadian-born WASPs. Take away the spelling errors, and Soharwardy’s and Elmasry’s websites read a lot like white supramacist websites. Replace the Arabic and Urdu accents with a Southern drawl, and Soharwardy and Elmasry sound a lot like former KKK leader David Duke. But in the politically correct eyes of the HRCs, Soharwardy and Elmasry are ‘victims’ by nature of their race and religion, so they couldn’t possibly be bigots in their own right.”
