21 January 2008

The Interview: Ezra Levant

You won't wanna miss this one... tonight at 8 EST on TVO...

Free speech or hate speech: former Western Standard publisher Ezra Levant on his fight with the Alberta Human Rights Commission over the magazine's publication of the Danish Mohammed cartoons.
You can warm up with these.

**********

LAST WORD: Look who just woke up...

After the international MSM picked it up... the Globe and Mail couldn't continue to plead ignorance.
It was so banal, so routine. When she walked in, she seemed happy. With a smile, she reached out her hand to shake mine. I refused — to me, nothing could have been more incongruous.

Would I warmly greet a police officer who arrested me as a suspect in a crime? Then why should I do so for a thought crime?

This was not normal; I would not normalize it with the pleasantries of polite society.
*


16 comments:

Anonymous said...

I heard on CFRA that Ezra and Mark Steyn will be on Bill O'Reilly tomorrow night

Neo Conservative said...

*
there's a one-two punch.

*

Anonymous said...

The globe has it on their 'exclusive web content', in other words since the whole blogosphere already knows about it they will acknowledge it there but not in the print edition.
Gutless cowards.
They've been censoring comments on anything that mentions the HRC story as well.
Once Fox News picked it up their hand was forced.

Anonymous said...

Can I assume that Ezra will be doing a spread on the Piss Christ next? Somehow I doubt it.

Did he have the right to do what he did? Yes.

Is he still an asswipe? Yes.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"anon said... Is he still an asswipe?"

that's it? shout a nasty name and run away?

that's impressive.

*

Crazymamma said...

I saw the interview tonight. Ezra was Ezra, not out to win any popularity contests, but man, is that man right when he is right.

Panel after Ezra left a wee bit to be desired. Two Muslim Gents talking about how they were offended by the printing of the toons and how they felt this was promoting trickle down racism. Fair enough, all I have to say is if the moderate Muslim community is wronged by the topic of radical Islamics then they need to distance themselves by ranting against THEM instead of those that report on the radicals and their agenda. Here In Canada we think if you are quiet, don't condemn the actions of extremist, it's because you agree with them.

Neo Conservative said...

*
ezra made his points... he was, as usual, lucid and to the point. thank goodness... because the rest was a letdown.

the discussion was mostly people carefully stepping around actually saying anything.

the two muslim guys, both lawyers, admitted that they, both as citizens and in their professional capacity, wouldn't have done the hrc thing... but that imam syed was acting out of frustration.

their message boiled down to... "can't we all just get along?"

the non-muslim lawyer made a few good points about the law not being meant to assuage hurt feelings... but nobody really heard him.

apart from ezra... this was mostly mush.

*

Anonymous said...

crazymamma said....

"Here In Canada we think if you are quiet, don't condemn the actions of extremist, it's because you agree with them."

...OR are afraid of them.

Neo Conservative said...

*
too true.

*

Anonymous said...

\that's it? shout a nasty name and run away?

I'm not sure what else you were looking for. Everyone has the right to insult each other, but that doesn't change the fact that people who do are just generally shitty people - particularly when they do it 'unilaterally', for sensationalist reasons, and then lean on freedom of speech to justify it. If you'd prefer something that's not a 'name', then I will say that I think his actions were reprehensible, self-serving and divisive, with hints of low-grade hatred. I would say the same thing about someone doing similar things to purposely insult any religion.

As I said, I don't expect him to equally express his freedom of speech by insulting Christians or Jews.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"anon says... I will say that I think his actions were reprehensible, self-serving and divisive, with hints of low-grade hatred."

no... you still don't get it.

how this works is... you state your premise... then offer proof in support of that statement.

you do the first half just fine.

and note, frustration and hurt feelings don't have shit to do with this.

all you're doing here is shouting angry words in the window... and then running away like a frightened little girl.

in the words of p.j. o'rourke... show us "the logic and the lab equipment".

*

Neo Conservative said...

*
oh, yeah... one other thing.

what the hell is "low-grade hatred"?

*

Neo Conservative said...

*
watching the rerun of the tvo programme again... the two muslim lawyers have referenced both the nazis and lynching black people in the united states.

it's absurd... they don't actually want to talk about ezra, or macleans and mark steyn.

the non-muslim lawyer... grant huscroft... has the pithiest line of the night... "so we'd better not publish these cartoons because it'll make people in other countries commit murder and mayhem... I don't even know where to begin to unpack that."

the one muslim lawyer agrees, "you cannot have violence suppress speech"... but then goes on to yammer about how frustrated the muslim community is.

the second muslim lawyer also says the "frustration is justified".

so we're back to "hurt feelings".

these two guys (as lawyers) both agree that the hrc complaint isn't the way this thing should be played... but as muslims they are obviously playing to "the community".

it's pretty hypocritical... but they've gotta support the home team, i guess.

the show is indeed more informative the second time around.

*

Anonymous said...

If he's so concerned about demonstrating our right to free speech, then why did he not insult Christians or Jews years ago? Why pick Islam?

Crazymamma said...

"If he's so concerned about demonstrating our right to free speech, then why did he not insult Christians or Jews years ago? Why pick Islam?"



Hmmmmm, seems to me that Christians and Jews take it on the chin in a constant stream of offensive material. Which is so very BESIDES the point here.

As a Canadian I had a right to see with my own eyes what the heck all the hullabaloo worldwide was about. Why people were rioting in the streets, why churches were torched, why 50 some people were killed, why a price was put on the head of the cartoonist.

I think that I have a right to see them and use MY OWN intellect and reasoning and not just take SOMEONE ELSE'S word for it that they were bad.

Maybe others are happy to have faceless reactionaries make these decisions for them, I am not one of those sheep thank you.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"anon mewls... Why pick Islam?"

well, nonny... let's break that down.

after the cartoons were published in denmark... which religious denomination went totally apeshit... destroying property, setting fires and yes... murdering people.

answer: not christians or jews or buddhists or hindus... or even those wacky scientologists.

who hijacked four airliners and flew them into oblivion and destroyed the world trade center?

answer: not christians or jews...

i could go on and on ad nauseum... but i trust you get the point.

guess what... if you can't stand the thought of "free speech"... nobody's stopping you from climbing on that big silver bird and heading for the islamic paradise of your choosing.

so go ahead babycakes... choose.

*