Why are we losing our freedoms in this country, slowly but surely?
Because all too often we don't fight hard enough to protect them. We passively let the bureaucrats and politicians take away our rights.
That's why it's so heartening to see Ezra Levant stand up and challenge the state.
As is well known by now, the Alberta Human Rights Commission is after Ezra because his old magazine published controversial cartoons.
The easy thing to do would have been to grovel and apologize.
But Ezra won't do it.
Instead he is mounting a spirited defence of free expression and in the process putting a spotlight on the injustice that is the Human Rights Commission.
If more Canadians followed Ezra's lead and stood up for what's right, this would be a freer country.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
... Agreed, that this issue does not require the forced intervention of the state.
... However, this case invites consideration of our use of freedom- to be used in an inflammatory, divisive way, or in a respectful, constructive way.
Good old Ezra and Mark Steyn...
There they are putting up the good fight against "Islamofascists" right here in rural Alberta and Ontario...
And they can always count on their brethren in the mainstream press corps to stand behind them in their crusade and defend their simplistic demographic projections...
lol... Look, I know that Steyn is right about the fact that Muslims are taking over the world.
However, lets not tell the over 2 billion people in India and China that because they might get upset.
PS. I lost 10 pounds in the last month -- At this rate, I should disappear in under 2 years.
In other words, IGF agree on this one!
I loved it when Ezra fought against the state in Alberta when Albertans were trying to receive a fair deal with oil revenues.
He sided with the barons and threated Albertans with repercussion for the industry. LoL
Ezra kinda reminds me of the CTF, Here in my province they want to sell off Hydro, so the province can pay down it's debt. But at the same time like our telecom service the rates will increase 50-60%.
No I will stick with my publicly owned institutions rather then American owned institutions/pundits!
Oh that and the Western Standard should have been charged with treason at least by putting our solders in harm for no bloody reason whatever!
Besides these are just inquiries, right...
Both sides get their right to talk in front of the judge... Nobody is being silenced. The system is working.
And as I have read in Andrew Coyne's recent Macleans article about the Mulroney-Schreiber deal, Canadians should not make such a big deal about a simple inquiry.
I wonder why there is a double standard at Macleans on this point... I guess when one is actually the defendant, things change...
I am a strong believer in freedom, although whether we are losing or not is questionable. When it comes to ending discrimination, I would argue we are moving towards more not less freedom. Even on the economic front, government is not as large as it was 20 years ago and the trend is towards smaller government even if not as fast as some like.
At the same time, I don't think we need more Ezras as I find many of his views quite extreme and he seems to only believe in more freedom when it benefits him, not for all groups.
Anonymous #6:
Actually, I didn't even know that Ezra was Jewish...
There are no "speech police" in Canada -- it is a simple inquiry where both sides will get their say.
Some comments in Canada are being deemed "anti-Semetic" nowadays; I am not entirely sure why some comments could not also be deemed "anti-Muslim"...
Canada is a diverse country... Miles Lunn makes a good point!
Mark Steyn will also have his day in court to stand by his opinions published in Macleans...
I still don't see what the problem is.
It's nice too see that there is still some rational conservatives around.
I would have been a PC myself but this new Americanized conservative party is quite frankly, Un-Canadian.
Look at last months Mcleans artical the NDP are the best politicians.
NDP way to Be!
I always think of your Liberty Seminar speech about guerilla warfare. I think this is one good example where we're outnumbered.
Muslims against sharia:
I disagree.
I am a non-Muslim, and I think that both these inquiries are quite legitimate. I do not feel that it is the "investigations" as you have have put it that have been divisive...
On the contrary, the issue in a country as diverse as Canada is whether the media should be allowed to be purposely used in a non-constructive, divisive way...
If Steyn and Levant (as "experts" on the topics that they have chosen to address) can defend their arguments with both reason and facts, they have absolutely nothing to worry about here...
If Steyn's writings are humour then perhaps it is best labelled as such. Until recently, Macleans was considered a "news magazine."
However, these inquiries show that we still live in a country where we are allowed to respectfully disagree and the necessary means to allow groups to air greivances...
Otherwise, the only real freedom would be for the media barons to print whatever polarizing, inflammatory garbage that they want without any consequence...
Worry about little ole me? Don't bother.
Or are you talking about that the reality that NDP politicians are the best?
Did you also know that they are balancing budgets twice as much as any Liberal or Conservative party on the Provincial level.
Why that appeals to my strong fiscal side!
And they are right on bigger issues like the enviroment, the war in Afghanistan, health care and poverty.
Zolton:
Agree.
Surprisingly, the NDP are looking much more reasonable these days, but these "Conservatives" are not really conservatives anyways...
I wouldn't judge all conservatives by a few rotten apples in the same way that most sensible people would not judge moderate Muslims to be "Islamo-fascists."
Macleans is very wrong to attempt to use the politics of polarization to market their magazine...
Let them answer for it at the inquiry as to why they are doing so...
Anon,
“I disagree. I am a non-Muslim, and I think that both these inquiries are quite legitimate. I do not feel that it is the "investigations" as you have have put it that have been divisive...”
When Imams calls for domination over of Christians and Jews it is OK, but when Ezra calls this Imam a radical or publishes some silly cartoons it’s not? That makes us (all Muslims) look like asshole cry-babies. That’s why we get comments like “Muslims are detested all over the world.” Why should moderate Muslims be blamed for something they disagree with?
If it were Christ with a crucifix up his kiester then the western world world be in an uproar. Justly so! Just because we cannot empathize with these people and their foreign customs does not give us provocation to print garbage.
Especially when our soldiers are being sent to Afghanistan at the same time! That cartoon probably fueled a thousand radicals!
For me I consider that to be a treasonous act, for the cartoon was not about freedom of speech but fueling antagonisms.
Also last time I checked, Mcleans was more of a conservative viewpoint. Andrew Coyne is not the editor is he not? He was the editor of the national post, I would consider that fairly conservative.
Like honestly what do you get when you elect a conservative MP?
You give more power to the HARPER, and receive a parochial partisan individual who has no will of their own but follows the head Goomba!
Do you think that the issues of your consistency comes before or after partisan games?
zolton
"If it were Christ with a crucifix up his kiester then the western world world be in an uproar."
The fact that you're not aware about "Piss Christ" proves that there was no uproar.
Piss Christ doesn't apply to me, It applies to people who believe in Christianity.
There was an uproar about that from what I can recall. I don't agree with that disgusting act like I don't agree with the "standards" disgusting act.
Freedom, be it freedom of speech or freedom of will means nothing with ought responsibility!
I still think that that was A treasonous act!
If I were A Muslim and I saw the prophet I believed in with a bomb under his hat, I would be upset.
Why are you defending something wrong that the western world has done?
"There was an uproar about that from what I can recall."
Complaining of a few fanatics hardly qualifies as an uproar. No charges were filed, and if somebody would have tried to file the charges, he/she would have been laughed at.
"Why are you defending something wrong that the western world has done?"
Since when exercise of Free Expression is wrong? Did you grow up in Nazi Germany?
Muslims against sharia:
Freedom of expression has limits in any diverse society.
One would likely get charged with a crime if one ran buck naked through a schoolyard full of children in Canada even if one used the defense that you were "freely expressing yourself."
I am not sure why the columnists facing inquiries, Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn, and now... Barbara Amiel, have made such a point to talk about their troubles in such a polarizing and divisive way. These are simply inquiries...
One does not need to draw comparisons to Nazi Germany and thought police. We used to have Royal Commissions all the time in Canada too...
Everyone needs to relax and quietly let these competent judges do the work that they are paid to do...
Trying to invoke public sympathy on one's legal challenges did not work for Lord Black... In fact, it probably back-fired on him.
Anon,
"Freedom of expression has limits in any diverse society."
Of course it does. But there is a difference between political speech and taking a dump in a public square. The only time political speech should be limited is when the government has a compelling interest, i.e., national security, imminent danger to someone’s life, etc.
"Everyone needs to relax and quietly"
Muslims have been relaxing quietly fro generations while the extremists were taking over. Look where it got us.
I am reminded of this interesting piece, titled Salute the Danish Flag:
http://www.mackenzieinstitute.com/2007/danish-110107.htm
I can find no citation of that article in any academic journal. The only place I found the origination of this article was on BrothersJuddblog.com The 2002 article also is used to support the War in Iraq. People with common sense know that this war fueled rather then stifle Islamic terrorism.
Are these statistics as accurate as the reasons to why they went to war in the first place?
H.E could you cite some academic source for these statistics?
h.e, Your silence is golden!
Post a Comment