Mark Steyn has the details. (I’ve deleted the parts I could probably get [re]sued for reprinting):
Mr Butler also managed to get a reaction from Professor Moon. I don’t agree with the Prof on much – in his testimony at Queen’s Park, he revealed himself to be just another shill for the state enforcers – but this is a striking passage:
The human rights tribunal hears very few Section 13 cases either, Moon pointed out. “In the absence of Richard Warman, there really is very little happening under Section 13. You take him away, you’ve got nothing.”
Very true. So take him away, and then we can take Section 13 away. As I’ve been saying for a year and a half now, out of 30 million Canadians, why should Richard Warman be the only one to have his very own law? (…)
Mr Butler mis-labels Mr Warman as an “Ottawa lawyer and anti-hate activist”. He is, in fact, an “Ottawa lawyer and prominent author of multiple white-supremacist hate-speech Internet postings”. Perhaps the Citizen could run a correction.
Meanwhile, Deborah Gyapong reports on the folks who presume to be our betters, and our masters.
You won’t be surprised to learn, or be reminded, that Jennifer Lynch & Co are an assemblage of mediocre minds who disguise their stupidity behind Big Words They Learned in College, and on expensive international junkets paid for by our extorted tax dollars.
My co-defendant Ezra Levant has a long post:
Even B’nai Brith — the Official Jews who are, right now, prosecuting an HRC censorship case in British Columbia — came out with a strong denunciation of the report. (I’ve heard the phrase “two Jews, three opinions”. But BB’s Frank Dimant does better: “one Jew, two opinions”.)
(…)
So to sum up: we’ve got a Canadian Human Rights Commission that thinks censorship is some sort of “human right”. It is so operationally corrupt that it thinks issuing a report card about its own behaviour is legitimate conduct for a government agency. It so despises the public — and holds their intelligence in such contempt — that it thinks the country will forget that Prof. Moon has already recommended that their censorship powers be repealed.
It is so naturally Orwellian that it thinks it can invent counterfeit human rights, like the “right to be respected”, merely by coining those forgeries, and dressing them up as “modern” “rights” “matrixes”, and other such legal junk.
Scaramouche also smacks down Frank at BB:
So after being in on the ground floor of Canadian state censorship; and after itself getting bit on the tuches by it (a five-year-long persecution by the Manitoba “human rights” body sparked by an accuser who to this day remains nameless);
and after making some lame recommendations for “reforming” the system such that Jews would still get to kvetch about scary Nazis, but Islamists wouldn’t get to complain about Jews or non-Jewish “Islamophobes” like Mark Steyn with Jewish-sounding names (in other words, censorship for we, not thee–a clear impossibility in our multiculti Wonderland);
and after reading the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s new report which ignores the call to get rid of state censorship and instead presumes to demand for itself even greater censorship powers, Frank Dimant’s fiefdom still–still!–doesn’t get what’s at stake.
