Friday, December 21, 2007

The Titmice are still squeaking

I haven't written anything about the Muslim activists who have hauled Mark Steyn and "Maclean's" magazine before Canada's kangaroo court Star Chamber Human Rights Commission to save themselves the trouble of knifing him in the street refuting his arguments. It's a horrible, yet completely predictable, example of the soft fascism we live under in this country, and it's probably going to succeed. I just hope that Mark doesn't make the same mistake his friend Conrad Black did, and trust in the innate decency of the justice system. He'd better prepare to liquidate all his assets in Canada and move permanently to his home in New Hampshire.

Now the supposed Muslim "law students" who brought the complaint along with the CIC have emitted another squeal at the effrontery of David Warren for not being obsequious enough in his appreciation of their nose-in-the-air swaggering. "The Citizen" obligingly printed it in today's Letters section.
According to a recent study by the Canadian Islamic Congress, Maclean's magazine has published 18 separate articles containing similar Islamophobic bias between January 2005 and July 2007.
I guess it was too much trouble to list the number of pieces arguing the OPPOSITE side that Maclean's published - I believe the published something like 30 refutations of Steyn's thesis, but that doesn't count.
I think the vast majority of Canadians would be shocked to know that Canada's national magazine is being used to promote these arguments. [Actually, no, we wouldn't. We expect it, because we know it's one of the aspects of living in a free country. Hmmm. Maybe I'd better rethink that. Perhaps it's not "the vast majority" of Canadians who understand what living in a free country entails.] Mr. Warren is attempting to shut down a national dialogue on media fairness and human rights by claiming our approach is an attack on free speech. We hope that the irony of this argument is not lost on your readers.
Oh, believe me, the IRONY is not lost on me at all! The irony of these little pipsqueaks huffing and puffing that THEIR ATTEMPT TO GAG THE OTHER SIDE IN AN ARGUMENT is not sufficiently appreciated as a valuable approach to "a national dialogue on media fairness and human rights"!
Freedom of speech is a two-way street. [Yeah, and both ways go in OUR direction.] Our decision to seek a remedy from Maclean's through human rights commissions was only in response to the Maclean's editor-in-chief's refusal to grant appropriate space for a response to Mr. Steyn from a mutually acceptable author; Mr. Steyn himself is not a party to our complaints as Mr. Warren asserts.
In other words, the owners of Maclean's have a magazine, and we don't. You have, I don't have, so you give - the creed of the bum. They could publish their crap somewhere else (a writer for The Guardian even offered them space, for God's sake) but that's not the point. They don't want to communicate ideas; in true Muslim style they want to inflict ritual humiliation and force their enemies' foreheads onto the ground.

God, I hate living in a place where these smelly little nobodies have to be taken seriously.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

So if I disagree with something in a Muslim publication, they HAVE to print my "response"?

Nah... didn't think so...

10:48 am  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home