|
Wasn't that the Grits' slogan last time round? Daniel Simard, one of the "plaintiffs" in the "case" against Maclean's and a fellow whose line to the newspapers is that he only wants to start a debate, seems to be growing more comfortable with the explicit language of censorship:
Nothwithstanding, by the nature of your position, that Muslims are the ones being portrayed as barbaric savages whilst adhering to a radical form of Islamic fundamentalism, your remarks trodden down the path of vigiliantism to justify the perfidious tactics used against legitimate (and seemingly necessary) state censorship.
Don't worry trying to figure out what the hell that sentence means. Look at the last ten words. I believe he's a first-year law student but he sounds like the 1980s fag-end-of-Communism apparatchiks I used to run into in Hungary and Romania. (By the way, "fag end" is a British expression, not my latest hate crime.)
When the Facebook group of Ali Zee, Usher Ahmed, Super Samer, Issam Zeineddine, Khalil Jeha, Hussein Abdulbaki, Abe Rafih, Issam Khalil, and Manal Abdallah, all of Calgary, call Ezra Levant a "piece of shit JEW" who "bends over for toonies", Ezra shrugs it off and his pals have some sport with it.
When Kathy Shaidle, Jay Currie and I call the Law R Kewl pantywaists "nellies" and "baby barracudas", the poor wee bairns have a nervous breakdown and say that this all this beastly unpleasantness "reinforces the need for legal intervention" and that they're "sure there will be some bench in the future weighing in on that issue". Bench In The Future: I think I saw that movie.
Choose your Canada. Whom do you want the Canada of tomorrow built by? The "piece of shit JEW" who believes in freedom of speech even for Ali Zee and his twerps? Or the "nellies" who demand "legal intervention" and "state censorship" for every slight? Even if it were desirable for the state to regulate public (and semi-private) expression to the degree M Simard wants, it would be unsustainable. What a sad comment on the state of Canada's allegedly Number One law school that he seems incapable of understanding this.
PS As to the Anonypussy-in-chief's suggestion that I or my hired goons hacked their site, their twittering hysteria seems to be a function of their computer illiteracy. Still, if it turns you on to think of me (as you put it) brutally crushing you under my heels, I'm happy to be of service. They're stilettos, by the way, but from your squeals you probably guessed that.
|
