topleft
topright

THE TYRANNY OF NICE

Image

Out now! Kathy Shaidle and Pete Vere's must-read book on the Steyn case, the Canadian state's war on free speech, and what it means for America, too. This trenchant exposé comes with a rollicking introduction by Mark on his year in Canada's "human rights" hell. Order your personally autographed copy today - or double your fun with Steyn, Hewitt and The War Against The West in our War & Tyranny bumper bundle!

Image


Exclusively from
the Steyn Store


sol viva steyn image master.jpg

 Now available in three groovy colors
The Viva Steyn!
T-shirt
 

 
Tinker Taylor, statist spy Print E-mail
Steynposts
Thursday, 04 February 2010

Jennifer Lynch, QC (Queen Censor), Chief Commissar of the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission, has had a rough couple of years. But, no doubt emboldened by her many five-star lunches in Geneva with leading "human rights" bodies from Sudan, Saudi Arabia et al, she's clamped the electrodes to Section 13 and is making a spirited effort to get it up and running again:

    5.1 Definition of hatred and contempt - The Commission applies the restrictive definition of hatred and contempt established by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Taylor case. Applying this definition ensures that the exercise of the Commission’s mandate does not offend the Charter.

    This means that in order to come within the ambit of section 13, the communication that is the subject of the complaint must be so excessive and extreme in nature that it suggests that a given race, sex, religion or other group identifiable in relation to one or more grounds in the CHRA is devoid of any redeeming qualities as human beings. If the message does not meet this threshold, it will not be found to come within the ambit of section 13, notwithstanding that the message is offensive, controversial, shocking or disgusting to some.

As Scaramouche notes, this is complete rubbish. By the time the Maclean's case was under way, Commissar Lynch's dress-up Nazis had long since flown the coop of any "restrictive definition". As I said in my testimony to Parliament:

Hatefinder Warman and his enablers at the commission abused the extremely narrow constitutional approval given to section 13 by the Supreme Court in the Taylor decision and instead turned it into a personal inquisition for himself and his pals.

That's what eventually got 'em into trouble. And their current enthusiasm for Taylor is no more than a tactical feint to prevent the Supreme Court reconsidering the issue in light of Hatefinder-General Warman & Co's all too predictable statist bender.

Kathy Shaidle makes another point - that the CHRC is now Canada's largest publisher of racist commentary: It's the one-stop shop for all your racist needs. To take another point I made to Parliament:

Let me take the most recent example of a section 13 conviction. The sole charge on which Marc Lemire was found guilty a month ago was for a post that appeared at his website, written by somebody else. That piece was read by a grand total of just eight people in the whole of Canada, which works out to 0.8 of a Canadian per province, or if you include territories, 0.6153 of a Canadian. And almost all those 0.6153s of a Canadian going to this website and reading this piece were Richard Warman and his fellow dress-up Nazis at the Human Rights Commission, salivating at the prospect of having found another witch to provide more bounty.

In other words, no one in Canada saw this post. No one in Canada read it. Nothing could be less “likely to expose” anyone to hatred or contempt than an unread post at an unread website. Yet Canadian taxpayers paid for Jennifer Lynch and the Nazi fetishists at the commission to investigate this unread bit of nothing for six years.

In the course of securing this itsy-bitsy single conviction, these psychologically disturbed employees of the Human Rights Commission wrote and distributed far more hate speech of their own.  

By the way, Kathy is absolutely right to reprint one of the "hate poems" helpfully anthologized by the CHRC. Aside from the fact that the author should have been prosecuted for his appalling false rhymes, the notion that material deemed not only criminal but dangerous if printed on a private unread web site can be disseminated perfectly legally by a far more widely read government website exposes the lie on which Commissar Lynch's lavish sinecure rests - that, if exposed to this material, the moronic citizenry would be rampaging down the 401 from one pogrom to the next.

No, they wouldn't. It's wholly irrelevant to the Queen's peace, but it's vital to control-freak conceptions of state power. Underlying the barely veiled classist assumptions of Canada's Chief Censor is the one unyielding belief that you, a supposedly free citizen of a settled democracy, are a child, too stupid to exercise freedom for yourself. The central pillar of Trudeaupia - that a vast government apparatus is needed to mediate relations between designated sub-groups of the populace - is incompatible with liberty. Reject it, resist it, and, if that all sounds too much like hard work, at the very least apply for a grant to make a giant invisible banana to fly over CHRC headquarters. 

 
Regular Guy, broken man Print E-mail
Steynposts
Tuesday, 02 February 2010

Guy Earle is the stand-up comic being dragged through British Columbia "human rights" hell by two drunken lesbians who decided that his put-down of their heckling was "homophobic". His trial begins in Vancouver on March 29th. If you read his latest update here, it's clear that Mr Earle is in a bad way:

The HRC is being used as a tool for personal gain from a group that has no class, scruples or understanding. Of all the Canadian installations, wouldn't you want the HRC to have some kahoonies? Ah but... this is a make work project for their people, isn't it? They don't care that two years of my life is GONE. There is no concept of the damages they cause, the opportunities I've lost... Wow, you thought I was bitter BEFORE? Well, now I've become so bitter I can't perform. In a lot of ways, they've won already.  

And, in case you doubt that, listen to him in this interview with one of the few media guys to be following this story, CHQR's Rob Breakenridge. Mr Earle sounds like a man on the verge of an on-air breakdown.

Different people react to "human rights" torture in different ways: Ezra Levant and I are oppositional by nature and by profession. You take a swing at us, we'll swing back. Go ahead, "human rights" punks, make our day. So is Marc Lemire, whose bloody-minded refusal to sit there and take it wound up inflicting more damage on the racket than anything else.

But most victims of Canada's thought police aren't like that: They're just regular folks trying to get on with their lives without catching the eye of the state enforcers, and, in that sense, Guy Earle is far closer to the gay guy with acute sinusitis forced to close down his b-&-b or the health-club owner taken to the cleaners by a pre-op transsexual who wanted to use the ladies' showers. These are fellows leading fully compliant Trudeaupian lives who nevertheless find they've managed to attract the attentions of an ever more whimsical tyranny. It would be interesting to know what might have befallen Catsmeat Kinsella, notorious ethnic comic and Count Iggy's lead attack chihuahua, had he essayed his culinary jests in a Vancouver comedy club. That's the point: No matter how daintily you tiptoe on PC eggshells, it'll never be enough.

I feel very sorry for Mr Earle. The most interesting part of the Rob Breakenridge interview is when he muses on some of the website comments that appeared after news reports about the case: "This is the best thing that could happen to Guy Earle’s career", etc. "That is not how this works at all," explains the comic, recounting how he was being lined up for some event in Vancouver until the promoter got wind of the suit and decided he didn't need a lot of trouble from the gay community. "A lot of people don’t want to have anything to do with me," he says. "I don’t know what the silver lining is."

And he hasn't even been convicted of anything yet.

It's interesting to me how all those promoters who claim to be committed to producing "edgy", "transgressive", "provocative" comedy wilt like pansies in the face of one "human rights" complaint. But it's invariably the case that the self-congratulatory left, forever hailing itself for its courage in speaking truth to power, is never there when real courage is needed - even if, like Guy Earle, you're essentially one of their own. This shouldn't be difficult even for the myopic politically correct bores who run most comedy clubs. As I wrote here:

Sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two evils, and, if it’s a choice between offensive gags or massive expansion of state power, no self-respecting citizen should find it difficult working out which is the lesser evil and which is the greater threat.

And yet Mr Earle's professional colleagues do seem to be finding it difficult, if not impossible. Strange that.

I haven't followed the Earle case very closely. But, judging from his interview with Rob, he and his legal team have made a couple of missteps. He says he offered a kind of apology and to make a donation to a "woman advocate group", whatever the hell that is. Stupid, stupid, stupid. When you do that, you're accepting their framing of the case - which is that what's at issue is your behaviour. Wrong. What's at issue is BC's and Canada's crappy, worthless, ever more expansive and coercive "human rights" regime. By offering Danegeld (Dykegeld?) to some or other third party, you confer legitimacy on the process. Very foolish.

The other mistake Guy Earle seems to have made is really psychological. Two years ago, when the Canadian Islamic Congress thing went public, I spoke to Ezra, and his very first words to me were to caution against allowing myself to be consumed by the case. That's very important - because, as Jennifer Lynch, QC, Heather MacNaughton, Barbara Hall and the other commissars understand, the object is denormalization. You can denormalize the victim by convicting him, or simply by drawing out the process for a sufficient period of time that you damage his reputation irreparably. But sometimes you can persuade the victim to denormalize himself, applying such pressure that a regular mainstream generalist guy becomes a quivering one-note obsessive gibbering to himself in a corner. Ezra's advice was very useful. There were moments when I felt myself getting boxed into the aforesaid corner, and, remembering Ezra, I made a point of punching my way back out. As readers will know, a couple of weeks after the British Columbia trial ended, I was in London recording "A Marshmallow World". People wondered why. Well, in part to prove that I could - that I wasn't going to be defined by Commissar MacNaughton's troika of tossers or Mohammed Elmasry's sock puppets, and wind up as someone who talks about repealing Section 13 for the rest of his life.

I'm glad to say the denormalization failed. Since getting labeled a hatemonger, I've gotten more invitations to Sussex Drive than I ever did before. When Ezra and I spoke in Ottawa last spring, half the cabinet showed up, and even several Liberals and Bloquistes. Best of all, I have Canada's "human rights" regime to thank for transforming my reputation in the Province of Quebec. I used to get nervous in Montreal restaurants when I'd be dining with non-political friends and catch someone at a nearby table murmuring sotto voce the dread words "droits des personnes". But in every case it turned out to be a fellow diner wanting to congratulate me for sticking it to the kangaroos. A prominent Quebec businessman sent over a magnum of champagne to my table in gratitude. An usher at the Montreal Jazz Festival moved me down the aisle to a better seat. Running late for a flight to Heathrow from Dorval last month, I was very grateful for the crossing guard who stopped the traffic for me and told me to keep fighting till the HRCs were scrapped. A few weeks ago, I was in the Ivy in London late one night having a drink with a producer pal when a very famous actress came in. "Mark, you old hatemonger you!" she bellowed across the room, and came over for a big huggy-kissy. After all the slobbering, my producer chum said, "I'm always surprised your thespian friends still speak to you." So am I, to be honest.

But they do - if you frame the issue in liberty-vs-state terms rather than one of political correctness. By contrast the last surviving sock puppet Khurrum Awan - formerly of the Sockson Five, the Four Socks, the Sockston Trio, Socky and Cher and now Socky Bono - has been reduced to suing Ezra Levant because his friends no longer speak to him. Who denormalized whom, eh?

Guy Earle sounds like he could use a bit of Ezra-type advice right now, so for what it's worth here it is: Get on with your life. Do comedy shows. Do a show somewhere in Vancouver while the trial is on, even if you have to rent the room yourself. You're a full-time comic and a part-time defendant, not the other way round. And, if you do talk about the case, don't meet 'em halfway by talking bullshit about making donations to "women advocate groups". The only issue is this: Canada is now a land where the state regulates comedy acts.

The trial on March 29th will be a disgrace. You don't apologize, you don't donate, you put the system on trial.

That's really the only insight you need: It's about them, not you.

PS Kathy Shaidle says: "Just tell them to **** off." I would guess he doesn't want to have his bank accounts frozen or be rendered unemployable in British Columbia. Also, I don't believe, under BC law, you can appeal to a real court if you don't acknowledge the process in the most minimal way. That's why, as I did, you should show up in Heather MacNaughton's courtroom, guffaw occasionally, and in the scrum on the steps aside denounce her as a statist thug and buffoon. In other words, if you're going to tell them to f**k off, do it to their faces.

Under BC's shitty "human rights" code, Maclean's and I were, as a point of law, guilty. So we dared them to convict. And, like all bullies when someone stands up to them, the gutless pussies wimped out. I understand Guy Earle doesn't have as deep pockets, but he needs a support network that will make the political price too high for Commissar MacNaughton. The freespeechy bloggers fulfilled that function for me. The radical comedy crowd don't seem to be stepping up for Mr Earle. In the end, one Kathy Shaidle is worth a hundred guys who do lame-o Stephen Harper gags.    

 
Hiatus speech Print E-mail
Steynposts
Saturday, 30 January 2010
A couple of weeks after my troubles with the Canadian thought police got going, a website called "Free Mark Steyn!" appeared. It's now called Free Canuckistan, which name rightly identifies the broader assault on liberty by the "human rights" regime. But it remains the work of the same cheerful impresario who started it two years ago. Under the Binksmeister, it's become an important clearinghouse for stories about the intersection of Islam and the west and the consequences for free speech and other rights. Binks is under the weather and having to take a break for a few weeks to get back on his feet. Wander on over and wish him well. We need him back at full strength and sticking it to the totalitarian social engineers with gusto.  
 
Censory pleasures Print E-mail
Steynposts
Thursday, 28 January 2010

Jennifer Lynch, QC (Queen Censor), Chief Commissar of the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission, not only shares the same views on freedom of speech as her Third World dictator pals but apparently envies them their Swiss bank-account lifestyles, too. The Canadian Taxpayers Foundation reports on a significant pattern of under-reporting in Queen Jennifer's public declaration of her junketing expenses. And, when lawful Freedom of Information requests are filed, Canada's Chief Censor simply declines to comply:

In the Information Commissioner's rulings dated January 27, 2010, the CHRC was deemed in all three cases to have failed to comply with the law and provide the required and complete information within the proper time frame.

As the CTF notes, the CHRC's contempt for Canada's access-to-information laws is entirely consistent with its contempt for Canada's constitution, the Supreme Court Taylor decision and the Dominion's entire legal inheritance. This is a rogue agency, out of control, beyond reform, and disdainful not only of the individual citizen's rights but even of the minimal restraints imposed by the government.

 
Elmo? Who's he? Print E-mail
Steynposts
Thursday, 31 December 2009

Scaramouche decodes the latest press release from Wahida Valiante, president of the Canadian Islamic Congress.

Much of it is just predictable whiney drivel about being (at least temporarily) shut out from access to A-list ministers and the spigot of taxpayer gravy, plus a curious stylistic tic which suggests President Valiante sees being president of the CIC as akin to being president of the USA: She speaks about policies pursued "under my administration". What exactly does the CIC "administer"? I know they attempted to establish a de facto and de jure right to administer the opinions of Canadian citizens, but they got given the bum's rush over that.

And that's the interesting aspect of President Valiante's pitiful plaint. This is an official communique from the CIC yet it in effect throws her predecessor, Mohamed Elmasry, under the camel:

Minister Kenny stated: "We have ended government contact with like-minded organizations like the Canadian Islamic Congress, whose President notoriously said that all Israelis over the age of 18 are legitimate targets for assassination."

What Minister Kenny fails to tell his audience is that those comments made by the CIC’s past president do not reflect the position of the CIC under my administration (since October 2008).

Mr. Kenny wouldn’t know that because he "ended government contact" with the CIC before ever having any contact with me. Moreover, he has refused any overtures to meet me since I took office. And so the first female president of a national Canadian Islamic organization has been denied any chance of meeting with a federal cabinet minister, based solely on comments made by that organization’s past president.

Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper would not assume responsibility for words spoken by Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, so why should I be held unjustly accountable for those of my precursor in office?

Well, for one thing, Stephen Harper didn't serve as Deputy Prime Minister to M Chrétien, whereas you cheerfully served for years as Vice-President to Elmo and indulged in the same obnoxious buffoonery - for example, your halfwit assertion that Daniel Pipes was a "follower of Hitler", for which you and the CIC were forced to apologize and pay restitution.

But never mind that. What's interesting is the way President Valiante disowns at some length "the CIC's past president" and deems him so persona non grata she won't even use his name in the communique. This Mohamed is now as unmentionable as the other Mohammed is undrawable.

This too is fallout from the Maclean's case and the campaign to restore free speech in Canada. Over the last two years, every illustrious figure on the pro-censorship side has been diminished - from Jennifer Lynch, QC to Stormfront member Richard Warman, and now to Elmo himself. Even the CIC understands that. Happy New Year, Elmo - and here's to more of the same in 2010! 

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

FREE SPEECH FOR CANADIANS!

Keep up to date with the campaign to rid Canada of government-regulated opinion. Check the Binksmeister daily

ONE HARDBACK!
TWO HATEMONGERS!

aa paperback medium.jpg 

The new book by Ezra Levant with a special introduction by Steyn

Shakedown
Ezra takes you behind the scenes in the Danish cartoons case, the Steyn/Maclean's case, and the Canadian state's war on free speech and real human rights.
Order your copy personally autographed by Mark exclusively from
The Steyn Store

Got a comment on a column? Drop a line to Mark's Mailbox

© 2010 SteynOnline

Joomla Template by Joomlashack
Joomla Templates by JoomlaShack Joomla Templates