|
In this post, Kathy Shaidle kinda sorta implies that Jay Currie and I have gone nancy on her. Just to clarify, I think Jay's analysis (see below) is a very plausible explanation for Judge Hadjis' reasoning - assuming that he had any higher ambition than to unhoist himself from the petard Richard Warman had put him on.
But for me personally it makes no difference what he thinks. In an exchange which didn't make his published report, Joseph Brean of The National Post asked me what I expected Parliament to do now, and I replied: Nothing. I expect nothing of the Government of Canada in particular, or of the political class in general, never mind the vast herd of statist suck-ups like "journalism doctor" (and renowned ovine fornication specialist) Professor John Miller* who regard themselves as qualified to pronounce on this issue. I'm not waiting for the Supreme Court to strike down Section 13 or for the Government to repeal it. I've repealed it myself. I do not regard myself as within its jurisdiction. I've opted out. I say what I want, and, if Commissar Lynch and her dress-up Nazis want to go one more round, well, go ahead, "human rights" punks, make my day.
But I don't think they will. As I always said, under the British Columbia "Human Rights" Code, Maclean's and I are guilty. No question of it. Indeed, after the verdict, Ken Whyte and I had a long discussion on how to appeal our acquittal. That's how nutty Canada's "justice" system has become in order to provide a living for shakedown artists like Warman and social engineers like Barbara Hall.
In The Ottawa Citizen (which also has an editorial on the subject), David Warren has a characteristically robust column. However, I disagree with him on this point:
The charges brought against Mark Steyn through the B.C. “human rights” bureaucracy, and against Ezra Levant through Alberta’s, had already exposed “human rights” commissions to much light, of exactly the sort they least wanted. They have already achieved their chilling effect, by warning every journalist in Canada who fails to toe a politically-correct line that he, too, could be dragged through their machinery for years, at huge and unrecoverable cost to himself, even if the case is later casually dismissed. This having been achieved, they needed to cut their losses.
I can't speak for your average pantywaist columnist, who will be as craven as he would have been anyway. But I don't feel "chilled", I feel liberated. After all, under BC pseudo-law, Ken and I are guilty. Yet we got away with it. On to the next hate crime!
Because the Canadian establishment is divided between (a) Trudeaupian social engineers and (b) wimps, Section 13 and its provincial equivalents will stay on the books for the forseeable future. Therefore, all we can do, for the Reverend Boissoin and any other unfortunates who attract its attention, is render it unenforceable. In that respect, we've made a great start.
[*UPDATE: I see the ovine fornication specialist has returned to the fray, as inept as ever.]
|
