barrelling down the slippery slope and gaining steam

The Human Rights Commissions in Canada are under the microscope right now due to the Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant trials (to call them trials, even though they take place in buildings with the word "court" written on the door, is preposterous) proceedings. And while public attention is focused on those two, there are still other proceedings going on all the time. The latest ruling, in the Rev. Stephen Boissoin case, states in part that

Mr. Boissoin and [his organization] The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc. shall cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the Internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals. Further they shall not and are prohibited from making disparaging remarks in the future about Dr. Lund [the complainant] or Dr. Lund's witnesses relating to their involvement in this complaint. Further all disparaging remarks versus homosexuals are directed to be removed from current websites and publications of Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc.

The ruling goes on; it is fascinating reading, if one is fascinated by venality.

The ruling admits that "...there is no specific individual who can be compensated as there is no direct victim who has come forward seeking redress", and yet Boissoin must pay Dr. Lund $5000 because "Dr. Lund, although not a direct victim, did expend considerable time and energy and suffered ridicule and harrassment as a result of his complaint." [emphasis mine] Boissoin is also on the hook for up to $2000 of the complainant's witness's expenses.

Boissoin said some nasty things in his letter, but did not incite violence; he did not shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater where no fire was present; he did not write that homosexuals ought to be killed; he did not do anything but express his opinion in a letter to the editor of a small-city newspaper. And for that, he is not only out of pocket for up to seven grand to someone who was not harmed in any way by his words, but he is forever prohibited from exercising his right to free political speech. If the text of the ruling is followed to the letter, then if Boissoin even says in private email correspondence that "Lund is an asshole", Boissoin will go to jail for contempt of court!

These Human Rights [sic] Commissions are an abomination in a liberal democracy. In these hearings there is no presumption of innocence; truth is not a defence; fair comment is not a defence; freedom of speech as guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not a defence; all costs for a legal defence are borne by the defendant but the costs for prosecution are borne by the government; no harm must be demonstrated in order for a conviction and subsequent financial compensation to the complainant; no rules of evidence apply; the cases may be tried in multiple jurisdictions simultaneously (Mark Steyn was exposed to of all things triple jeopardy, being tried in Ontario, BC, and soon in the Federal HRC); the complainant need not reside in the jurisdiction where the proceedings take place, nor even show up for the proceedings;"expert" witnesses do not need to have expertise in the field in which they testify, nor must their testimony actually be relevant; and the tribunal "judges" need not have any legal training at all, nor apparently any familiarity with the rule of law or the operation of a courtroom; there is no such thing as a speedy proceeding (Ezra Levant's case has been ongoing for over 800 days; Boissoin lost his case in November and the ruling came out on May 30). These HRCs are nothing short of kangaroo courts.

At one time, the HRCs were charged with redressing discrimination in things like housing and employment, but like a cancer they have spread to suppressing free political speech: Steyn's, Levant's, Boissoin's, and potentially even my own (I published the Danish Mohammed cartoons, like Levant, as well as an image of the Piss Christ "artwork"). Once, just once, I would like to have the slippery slope argument proven wrong. I won't hold my breath.

The HRC must go

OK, now this has me really pissed off. A couple of years ago, there were a dozen cartoons featuring Mohammed published in a Danish newspaper. A few months later, some imam decided to incite riots over these cartoons, so he added a few more of his own and then told people how offensive they were. Well, the members of the "religion of peace" used that as an excuse to riot and kill a bunch of people who had nothing whatsoever to do with the cartoons. This is absolutely psychotic behaviour.

The Western Standard magazine chose to publish those cartoons, too, just to show people in Canada what all the fuss was about. The cartoons were newsworthy - after all, people were dying because of the riots supposedly incited by the cartoons - and yet of all the newspapers and magazines in Canada, only three other publications published any of the cartoons, other than the Western Standard (and one of those subsequently recalled every copy that they had printed). I myself published one of the cartoons on my blog. Here is the entire set of twelve cartoons (with a tip of the hat to Kate):














That's it. Those twelve cartoons, which are pretty darn tame, are the reason that more than 100 innocent people lost their lives.

The words to describe such behaviour - rioting and killing innocent people over freakin' cartoons - include such terms as barbaric, insane, sociopathic, deranged, idiotic, stupid, and so forth. In short, these people are batshit crazy.

If the Western Standard had not published the cartoons, then a great many Canadians would have had no idea what all the controversy was about - they would have just figured that the Muslims had gone completely off their rocker. But after seeing those cartoons, Canadians could see that it was much worse than that: that the Islamic world was completely insane even before the cartoons were published. But, that is not what has me so pissed off. Instead, I'm angry about the subsequent actions of the Alberta government.

You see, some Saudi imam currently living in Canada took offense to the Western Standard's publication of the cartoons. So, instead of - for instance - writing about or speaking out against the publication of the cartoons, he called the Alberta Human Rights Commission and insisted that this government body force Ezra Levant, the publisher of the Western Standard, to apologize.

Well, one could excuse this Saudi for not knowing about such esoteric concepts as Freedom of Speech or Freedom of the Press. However it is absolutely inexcusable for the government to use its power - to subpoena Ezra Levant, to force him to waste his time appearing before this quasi-judicial commisssion, to force him to pay lawyers for his defence - simply for the "crime" of exercising his political freedom in Canada. And yet, that is exactly what happened. Levant taped his appearance before the commission (in reality, just a single bored bureaucrat - what was that line about the banality of evil?) and posted excerpts on YouTube. Here are those excerpts:



Now, I am an Albertan just like Ezra Levant. I also published one of those cartoons when the riots occurred and republished them all today. Although Ezra Levant is the one sitting before the commission, wasting his valuable time and money on lawyers, I may as well be sitting in the chair right beside him, for I am guilty of the same "crime" as he is, exercising my constitutionally-protected rights to free speech.

You know, I could make up my own cartoon, one which would be so offensive that members of polite society would shun me. That is their right, just as it is my right to make up and publish such a cartoon. The government legally has nothing whatsoever to say about it, and cannot censor me. I even seriously considered making up just such a cartoon (one involving the devil, Mohammed bent over a barrel, and 72 male pigs - use your imagination). However, my readership is low enough as it is, and I don't want it to go to zero. That is the way it should be. I publish what I want, people read it if they want to. If I go too far across the line of good taste, then I lose readers. The government has no say, nor should it have any say, in what I publish.

It is inexcusable that this quasi-judicial body has the power to force publishers like Ezra Levant or columnists like Mark Steyn (who is, by the way, next up before this kangaroo court) to appear before them simply for having exercised their constitutionally-protected and fundamental human right to free speech. It is doubly offensive that this star chamber is presided over by activists rather than judges, that the rules of evidence do not apply, that the motion to dismiss does not apply, that accusers can bring multiple suits and abuse the process with no consequences or cost to them, that the accused cannot choose to have more than one lawyer present - in short, that the rule of law and jurisprudence, not to mention 800 years of common law, are completely ignored.

Look, you want offensive? This is offensive:


That's the Piss Christ, supposed "art" which is merely a crucifix immersed in a jar of urine. Remember the riots, the more than 100 dead, the conviction of the artist in a kangaroo court, due to this craptacular, truly blasphemous "artwork"? No? Maybe that's because people in the Western world understand the concepts of civilization and Freedom of Speech. Maybe it is well past time for people in other parts of the world to grow the fuck up, too. And I know for certain that it is long past time for the abomination of the quasi-judicial Alberta Human Rights Commission to be disbanded - never again should the government use its power to punish people simply for exercising their fundamental rights to free speech. I hope (as does Ezra Levant) that the HRC rules against Levant or Mark Steyn - that way, this case can go to a real court, and be fought all the way up to the Supreme Court. Should it go that far, then the "human rights" commissions are done for, and good riddance.

Finally, here's a personal note to Syed Soharwardy, the POS that lodged this complaint against Levant with the AHRC:

This is how it is done in a free society. If someone writes or says something you don't like, then you write or say something in response. If people agree with you, then you win the argument. If they don't, then you lose and STFU. Using the government to silence your critics is the act of a coward. If I have the opportunity, I will call you a coward to your face. Luckily, I have the advantage of being right - and you'll still be a coward and a weasel. This is our system in free Western societies. If you don't like it, then either run for political office and try to change our laws from within our system, or go back to whatever third world hellhole (and there's a reason that it is a hellhole, while Western societies are not) you came from and wallow in your ignorance and stupidity and fear and cowardice. Jerk.