|
Ezra Levant has picked up on the Sock Puppet Five Four Three Two's latest missive, and Khurrum Awan's bizarre claim to have been the plaintiff in the Danish cartoons case. Ezra attributes Mr Awan's erratic relationship to the truth to taqiyya. Blazing Cat Fur suggests he has been possessed by a djinn. Scaramouche puts it down to delusions of grandeur.
I incline to the last explanation. My advice to Naseem would be to ditch him before he conscripts her to any more of his wacky self-aggrandizing.
In other freespeechy news, if Canadians don't like the idea of having the Internet regulated on "your" behalf by the CRTC, Commissioner Timothy Denton's observations (scroll way down) on free expression and the Dominion's legal inheritance may be of interest:
The history of the regulation of speech in this country does not engender confidence that such powers will be used wisely. Canada has experienced several instances in recent times where regulatory commissions of another type and armed with a different mission have challenged the right to say controversial things. The struggles of Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn and others have served as important warnings that regulatory authorities charged with combating racism, hatred, and other evils have consistently expanded their mandates, have abused their powers and eroded fundamental liberties. Wherever there is official orthodoxy, disagreement is heresy, and where there is heresy, there is usually an inquisition to root it out. After centuries ridding ourselves of thought control agencies, 20th century Canada re-invented them...
Nor is it difficult to imagine a state of affairs where "broadcasters" across the Internet could be subject to some of the existing regulations, for instance, those concerned with linguistic, religious or political balance that apply to those who use "scarce" public airwaves. Imagine Pat Condell, the acerbic British atheist, having to "balance" his views about religion and religions if he were subject to Canadian broadcasting regulation, for example...
If the Canadian portion of the Internet could be placed under the Act, and speech involving video, or sound, became a licensed activity, we would have reversed several centuries of constitutional evolution and gone back to the days prior to 1688 of licensed printing presses or, in our case, licensed video telephone transmissions as well as licensed computer users. Several important political revolutions have been fought to ensure freedom of the press and speech; it would be repugnant to nibble away at it in defence of anything as comparatively unimportant as Canadian broadcasting policy. Yet such a possibility does not lack for advocates.
I like the cut of this guy's jib. If the Government of Canada doesn't have the courage to scrap Section 13, why not at least get rid of Jennifer Lynch, QC and make Mr Denton Chief Commissioner of the "Human Rights" Commission?
|
