Support




Contact
Powered by
Movable Type

The Canadian Inquisition

There are a lot of Canadians who like to talk about how superior their values are compared to their thuggish neighbors to the south (members of their last few Labour Liberal governments spring to mind). Well, watch the clip below to see what apparently passes for official Canadian values these days.

Fortunately Ezra Levant, Publisher of The Western Standard, tells this petty apparatchik what she can do with her question about why he and his magazine published the so-called “Mohamed Cartoons”.

Little Green Footballs has more videos from the session.

In case you haven’t heard, Maclean’s Magazine is also facing a complaint from Canadian Muslims
for running excerpts from Mark Steyn’s best selling book, America Alone.

The “logic” of the left has become so twisted that tolerance means accepting and defending everyone’s values but your own.

Posted by: DrewM. at 06:29 PM



Comments

1 Good answer.

Posted by: Entropy at January 12, 2008 06:40 PM (HgAV0)

2 It isn't that the logic is twisted, it that the idea that political expression can cause harm is absurd.
Was it not Lord Blackwood himself who said "Stick and stones may break your bones, but names will never hurt you"? Plato?

Posted by: potosi Joel at January 12, 2008 06:47 PM (TPRbZ)

3

Dear Ottowa:

Phuh Que, eh?

Posted by: Western Canada at January 12, 2008 06:53 PM (0rl7n)

4

Well BRAVO!  I didn't know that there are any Canadians left with that much backbone.  Perhaps the Peoples Republic of Canuckistan has a small glimmer of hope left.

I am constantly in search of evidence of the existence of "The Remnant".  It is said that we will never know who makes up The Remnant but, I try anyhow.  It would give me a lot of hope to find someone like that.

If you liked this article/video, I recommend that you read an essay by Albert Jay Nock entitled "The Remnant".  Then you will also understand my point in this post.

Posted by: noprisoners at January 12, 2008 06:59 PM (eqMup)

5 The Candian InquisitionSomeone's mad about candy? What, See's or Whitmans?

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 12, 2008 07:02 PM (zTfCf)

6 Thanks Oregon. I bought a vowel.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 12, 2008 07:05 PM (hlYel)

7

OregonMuse:  You hit it exactly!

Coming soon to a bureaucracy near you.

Posted by: noprisoners at January 12, 2008 07:06 PM (eqMup)

8 The gentlemen is claiming an "inalienable right" to be offensive to Muslims.  Down here, we can base such claims on the First Amendment of our Constitution.  What does Canada have? Is there a body of case law that has been successfully argued in Canadian courts upon which The Western Standard and other publishers can stand?

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 12, 2008 07:11 PM (zTfCf)

9 My god.

Ezra Levant, Publisher of The Western Standard, has just become my Hero.

He has officially achieved Hero Status forever.


Posted by: Steamboat McGoo at January 12, 2008 07:12 PM (41Dd+)

10

Fellow morons , lend me your keypads .

Ezra needs an Acealanche , Kate as well . This shit is out the fuck of control . If you are reading this young Gabriel M. , I'd like your thoughts on this , moron (me) to not so moron .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 07:14 PM (Bivii)

11 There is a Canadian woman (I forgot her name) who wrote a book objecting to gay parenting based on her own experiences. She also has a website or she posted her views on an American website and the Canadian Hate Speech Nazis are after, too.            

This is why the european international law models suck.  All these "human rights" courts/commissions who do nothing but promote leftard causes have the ultimate power to order retrials and huge fines against an individual or the government.

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 12, 2008 07:16 PM (mJpMx)

12 OregonMuse,

The Canadian Charter of Rights:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
a) freedom of conscience and religion;
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
d) freedom of association.That seems pretty clear.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 12, 2008 07:16 PM (hlYel)

13 OregonMuse,

From Levant's opening statement, printed over at David Frum's blog on National Review:

"The 1960 Canadian Bill of Rights guaranteed, quote

1. " human rights and fundamental freedoms, namely,

(c) freedom of religion; (d) freedom of speech; (e) freedom of assembly and association; and (f) freedom of the press.

In 1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guaranteed, quote:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

a) freedom of conscience and religion;

b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication" "

and he cites other Canadian sources of his freedom as well.

Posted by: notropis at January 12, 2008 07:17 PM (E3IsL)

14 That was the finest response I could have imagined. That made my week.

For anyone starting a Top Ten list for political commentary for 2008, that right there is number one. I bet it remains number one until the next list in '09.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 12, 2008 07:18 PM (Y0gTb)

15 1960? 1986?

That's the problem. Civil rights have not had enough time to take root in Canada.

Posted by: Britt at January 12, 2008 07:20 PM (FK2zk)

16

. . . the Canadian Hate Speech Nazis are after her, too.   [Don't eat nachos when you type.]   

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 12, 2008 07:21 PM (mJpMx)

17

I heard Canada has it's own system of government, and currency.

 

That's cute.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at January 12, 2008 07:23 PM (FXakj)

18 It's even better the second time around... like an extra beer after a double pepperoni, thick crust pizza.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 12, 2008 07:26 PM (Y0gTb)

19

. If you are reading this young Gabriel M. , I'd like your thoughts on this , moron (me) to not so moron .

 

What , with your experience with international law , and all . With regards to Human Right Tribunals , and other masturbatory endeavours ....

 

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 07:27 PM (Bivii)

20 Thanks to notropis and Drew.  Well, it seems pretty clear that Levant's publishing of the Evil Cartoons of Doom is covered by some pretty basic legal protections that are explicitly spelled out.

Clear to everyone, I guess, except the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 12, 2008 07:31 PM (zTfCf)

21 This made my day, my week, my month, my year.This fellow deserves special recognition. Great job. I can not tell you how happy this makes me.

Posted by: Harry at January 12, 2008 07:35 PM (6VPHl)

22 Ezra lost his magazine The Western Standard  over this bullshit .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 07:36 PM (Bivii)

23 Intent = thought crime

How come not every newpaper in Canada is calling bullshit?

A lot of analysis, huh? Even if there is finding in his favor the damage is done in that it chills speech and causes people who don't kiss mohammed's butt $$$$ of legal costs.  Frankly, the commission/government should be fined and the money go to the Weekly Standard.

Oh, and how come people aren't in canada demonstrating with placards of the cartoons? That's what I would do.

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 12, 2008 07:39 PM (mJpMx)

24

Fighting over cartoons . . . did you ever think we'd see the day that something this stupid was undertaken by a religious group or by a government? 

Scary.

Great answers, Levant.  Thank you for defending the basic rights of freedom of speech and expression. 

p.s.  Courageous men are very sexy.

Posted by: Trekant at January 12, 2008 07:42 PM (PB5TC)

25

I'm sure she walked in there thinking that she'd just slip that question in there and he'd start trembling and begging for forgiveness, or at least put up the most meak of attempts at a defense.

What a shocker it must have been!

Posted by: jmflynny at January 12, 2008 07:45 PM (l25Zd)

26 I dunno ... do you think we can haul in Grary Trudeau and question him over why he's been painfully UNFUNNY for thirty years?

I mean, we might as well try to find the positive in the coming inquisition.

But, that video was beautiful. What could Canada POSSIBLY say in response to his arguments?

Posted by: carin at January 12, 2008 07:46 PM (1RIcI)

27 Oh , and hey , for those of you who aren't paying attention to this bullshit , Mark Steyn is next in line .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 07:47 PM (Bivii)

28 Goddamn that was awesome.  I want to give that guy a high five and buy him drinks for the rest of the night.

Did you see the look on that fascist little twat's face?  That's the stuff, right there, baby. 

I love how he cut right through her bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo about the oh-so-complicated "process" of analyzing and weighing various factors ....blabetty blah blah.  That's the thing I hate most about those fucking people.  They try cast some legitimacy about their actions with all their double speak and bogus, ever-shifting rules when all they're really about is trying to control you.

Posted by: Warden at January 12, 2008 07:55 PM (rZ5uY)

29 C'mon Gabe ......

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 07:55 PM (Bivii)

30 [big L] Liberal governments, Drew, not Labour. But spot-on otherwise, including our Left's condescension towards the "evil" U.S. (Just like your own Leftists'!)

Posted by: andycanuck at January 12, 2008 08:01 PM (BGw9N)

31 I was going to support him, but then I found out he was a Joo!  He's obviously guilty, now.

Posted by: Ron Paul at January 12, 2008 08:02 PM (XpmCg)

32 andycanuck,

Thanks. I got so excited about being able to spell Labor with a 'u', I got the whole damn thing wrong.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 12, 2008 08:08 PM (hlYel)

33 That woman is strikingly similar to the character Dolores Umbridge from the Harry Potter series.

Did anybody else get that feeling.

Posted by: Nom de Blog at January 12, 2008 08:13 PM (ThZCx)

34 You colour us with the wrong pen Dreow .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 08:15 PM (Bivii)

35 I have several Canadian friends and I've taken to laughing in their faces when they talk about how much better their country is.  That and asking them to pay me back for the whole providing the entirety of their military protection thing.

That was a thing of glory and needs to be broadcast far and wide. 

Posted by: alexthechick at January 12, 2008 08:22 PM (ZG2QS)

36 "The gentlemen is claiming an "inalienable right" to be offensive to Muslims.  Down here, we can base such claims on the First Amendment of our Constitution.  What does Canada have?"

See again the definition of "inalienable."  What that word should mean is that we have that right whether or not some government document grants it to us.

Posted by: Alex at January 12, 2008 08:23 PM (fgyj8)

37 Or I should say, purports to grant us what we already have.

Posted by: Alex at January 12, 2008 08:24 PM (fgyj8)

38

35

You have the wrong Canadian friends .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 08:26 PM (Bivii)

39

Heh. On a lighter note...

Hare Hare Yukai (Sunny Sunny Happiness)

And...

Some festival, in the middle of the fucking street in Tokyo.

I really need to go to Japan. Besides having a much larger quotient of grade A, LARP caliber NERDS, it's like the whole crazy ass country's on prozac and opiates. I can't imagine it ever rains.

Posted by: Entropy at January 12, 2008 08:27 PM (HgAV0)

40 Oh , and hey , for those of you who aren't paying attention to this bullshit , Mark Steyn is next in line .

Steyn ought to consult with Levant about what kind of questions were asked, etc., and then figure out the best way to get in some of his trademark zingers.

Oh, and insist on videotaping any interviews interrogations or hearings kangaroo-court proceedings and put 'em all up on youtube.

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 12, 2008 08:27 PM (zTfCf)

41 Bill D. Cat,

How would one contribute to help Ezra's or the Standard's cause? I tried to subscribe or find a link to make a donation (small as it might be) but found anything that would take money offline.

A) Is there a legal fund, and B) would they take dirty American money?

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 12, 2008 08:27 PM (Y0gTb)

42

"a) freedom of conscience"

I could use some of that, mine has been killing me for years. 

Posted by: Pupster at January 12, 2008 08:31 PM (BExLP)

43 Just found my write-in candidate if McCain gets the Republican nod.

Posted by: Hongqi at January 12, 2008 08:33 PM (+WuMm)

44

By God, if I have any chance to do anything about it that man should never be able to pay for a drink anywhere in North America again.  We really should take up a collection towards that purpose.

He should be able to walk into any bar or club on the continenent and say, "I'm "Ezra Levant, Publisher of The Western Standard. Send my bar bill for the night the readers of the Ace of Spaces Blog."

Really. It's been a long, long time, but I think I'm in love.

 

 

 

 

Posted by: Interested, very interested at January 12, 2008 08:34 PM (vmj3+)

45

How would one contribute to help Ezra's or the Standard's cause?

This is why I want Gabriels input . I do not understand these Human Rights Tribunals in Canada  .........as far as I can tell , all you need is a gripe...... the party making the gripe doesn't have to spend a dime . The party forewarding the gripe spends nothing . For the record , to the best of my knoweledge , no defendant has won one of these cases , ever .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 08:43 PM (Bivii)

46 I really really think Ezra should make out with me.

Posted by: Joanie at January 12, 2008 08:43 PM (Yyy1m)

47

Joanie ,

 

When I don't post as Bill D. Cat ...... I'm Ezra ..... but only to my fiends .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 08:53 PM (Bivii)

48 This "freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression" in Canada (and Europe) doesn't mean what Americans think it means.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 12, 2008 09:02 PM (ERV3B)

49 FUCKING. AWESOME.

Posted by: thebronze at January 12, 2008 09:04 PM (X/apF)

50
I’m not sure if going in front of these commissions and fighting these types of charges is such a good idea in that it recognizes their power.  Again, the threat of these commissions and the fact that defending yourself could bankrupt you even if you win is bullshit. And I don't think these laws are against the canadian charter. While we have the first amendment, it obviously doesn't allow some speech. The canadians have decided that speech such as "muslims suck" is akin to "Kill  Mohammend  Akbar who lives on 3rd and Alberta."

A quick check around the internet demonstrates that the canadian left  is against free speech. Lord, I hate leftards.

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 12, 2008 09:07 PM (mJpMx)

51 It's been a long, long time, but I think I'm in love.

Yeah. To paraphrase Harold Ramis in Stripes: I'm not gay, but I'm willing to learn.

Also, I love the look on the dumpy-looking government woman when he starts his opening statement. She just knows she's in for a mouthful and can't do anything about it.

Posted by: Andrew at January 12, 2008 09:14 PM (u5kpU)

52 Where's all the hippies having free concerts to support this cat? No marching, burning and looing in the streets to protest? Oh, he's a joooooo. I guess that legalized weed thing  can't get them out of mommies basement anymore. So free speech rights don't go for jooo non pot heads eh, hosers?

Posted by: hutch1200 at January 12, 2008 09:14 PM (5ie9v)

53

Chop Suey,

"And is one answer contrary to law?"

When she said,"No", He should have said," Then we are done here." and left.

Short of that: He kicked ass.

Posted by: captkidney at January 12, 2008 09:15 PM (Y48Sq)

54

The Left everywhere is against free speech -- and Canadian government, from the pinnacle in Ottawa to the lowest apparatchiks, is entirely dominated by the Left. Even their notions of conservatism are tainted by it.

Ezra Levant is a very brave man. He's put himself in the path of a humorless, remorseless, punitive machine. We could use more of his sort here in America. Perhaps he and Mark Steyn can be persuaded to join us full-time, here in the Land of the Kinda-Sorta Free.

 

Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at January 12, 2008 09:21 PM (GY/ii)

55
It's hard for me to believe that the validity of these tribunals has never been challenged in front of canada's highest court. It's clear that a good percentage of canadians support them so long as it is used against their political enemies. Start filing frivolous complaints against the moonbats and watch them go nuts. Then again, it is clear which side of the political spectrum these commissions are on, so I doubt they would allow a complaint to be filed against a leftard.

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 12, 2008 09:23 PM (mJpMx)

56
Steyn is already in the US and Levant will never abandon Alberta.

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 12, 2008 09:25 PM (mJpMx)

57 Thanks, Bill D. Cat.

I found a PayPal donation link at Ezra Levant's Saturday Night Smackdown the Fascist page.

I understand I may by pi**ing the money away considering the HRC's continuing precedents of guilty of all trumped charges no matter how asinine, but in this case, I don't care. Those lefty fascists need to know there will be blowback when they pull this stuff. If a few bucks will help keep the videos public and accessible, you know, in the spirit of free speech (a concept apparently foreign to the HRC), then maybe we can stop this hare kare of Dhimmtude getting forced upon us. If the HRC is concerned about feelings, let 'em feel the embarrassment and public flogging of their idiocy for a while.

I'm spittin' mad and I'm not even canuck.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 12, 2008 09:30 PM (Y0gTb)

58 Coming soon to an America near you - thought control! - by way of Hillary Clinton et all, the Democrat Party, and Muslims the world over.

It's not just an overt act that's chargable - but the mere thought!

What is happening to my America? Who ever conceived it could possibly come to this?

You must watch all three videos to get the true grasp of the evilness of these thought Nazi's.

Posted by: Bruce at January 12, 2008 09:30 PM (fpYmH)

59

I really want Gabe's advice . If these assholes can file a HRC complaint , why can't I ...... and why can't I name one of these HRC's as a defendant . To be honest , I'm truly offended .

 

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 09:40 PM (Bivii)

60 Fucking A!! That is one of the coolest things I've ever seen. I want to have his baby.

Posted by: CraigC at January 12, 2008 09:50 PM (NKOmS)

61 So, if Mr. Levant heads south, he will get:

a) free drinks
b) a make-out session with Joanie
c) a baby

sounds cool

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 12, 2008 09:58 PM (zTfCf)

62

I'm spittin' mad and I'm not even canuck.

You should see it through my eyes ....... this country is all hawk , and no spit .

Help us though , hit the links , and for fucks sake..... comment ..... comment with extreme prejudice

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 09:59 PM (Bivii)

Posted by: Jeff B. at January 12, 2008 10:01 PM (oRT5o)

64
We should start a "Cool Facts About Ezra Levant" thread.


For example:

When Ezra Levant gets cold, he doesn't turn on the heat, he just throws a couple of hippies on the fire.

The video was cut short after the Stalinist douchbag's face caught on fire from laser beams shooting out from Ezra Levant's eyes.

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 12, 2008 10:02 PM (zTfCf)

65 That apparatchik's face is the face of our future—nondescript, banal, schoolmarmishly deadly

Posted by: Mike Force at January 12, 2008 10:09 PM (iQT6P)

66

Looks like when the end comes, it will be a fine and not a bullet that murders freedom.

 

Posted by: captkidney at January 12, 2008 10:16 PM (Y48Sq)

67 When Ezra Levant points his index finger at you, three other fingers don't point back at him... they point at you too.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 12, 2008 10:18 PM (Y0gTb)

68

Ezra, put the tongue to her, medium style.

Posted by: captkidney at January 12, 2008 10:21 PM (Y48Sq)

69 I haven't watched the other videos yet, but I'm guessing that, at the end of the final installment, he leaps across the table, gouges out one of her eyes, and skullfucks her.

Posted by: Sean M. at January 12, 2008 10:22 PM (0U2lo)

70 Ezra's tongue-lashings leave welts.

Posted by: captkidney at January 12, 2008 10:23 PM (Y48Sq)

71

Norm MacDonald put it best ...... I'm Canadian .... but I love America better .

Ideals trump borders everytime.... you people have ideals ....me , I got's a border ..... eh .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 12, 2008 10:26 PM (Bivii)

72

I thought everyone was hobo hunting wtf with all these posts? 

Two questions.  How the hell do you  get the volume up on this shit, i know all my computer stuff is at 100%.  When you link it do you reduce the sound?

Second, Get rid of Youtube, you lazy val u rite assholes, write!!

Kemp

PS fuck the frogs

Posted by: kempermanx at January 12, 2008 10:34 PM (iLWmI)

73

I followed a couple of links from Steyn's page regarding this whole affair-from Steyn to the idiotic wiselaw blog and from there to the wretched bigcitylib blog. 

Wise is an attorney (or so he says-though I hold out the hope that he is actually something more useful to society, like a doorstop) who occasionally makes illogical and incoherent posts about the Steyn case.  Bigcitylib is the embodiment of the modern lefty who believes in nothing save their own will to power who currently has a couple of posts up attacking Levant for being a "drama queen" (cause apparantly no lefty has ever taken himself seriously in recorded history).  They are being fought in the comments on both blogs by defenders of free speech and neither seems inclined to argue the merits of the case (not that there position has any merit)-the best bigcitylib can do is the infrequent snark. 

That people like these represent the views of many who are in power both here and in Canada gives me the uncontrollable urge to go and clean my rifles.

Posted by: CavMedic at January 12, 2008 10:42 PM (rYFmu)

74 Fix that link to the Steyn article!  The Joos put an extra "http" in there.  RACISTS!

Posted by: Obama HQ at January 12, 2008 10:52 PM (XpmCg)

75 "1960? 1986?

That's the problem. Civil rights have not had enough time to take root in Canada.

Posted by: Britt at January 12, 2008 07:20 PM (FK2zk)"

Balderdash.  Canadians are supposed to enjoy the historic liberties of Englishman - those liberties which englishmen thought that any free man should claim for himself.  And mostly they did.  This travesty of justice that Mr. Levant  was subjected to would never would have happened in the old Canada, the pre multi-cultural Canada.

Our rights are not so very different.  Yes, we have a constitution which is intended to guarantee our liberties, but it does not grant them to us.  God grants us our liberties.  You may believe in God or not (I don't), but that's what the founding fathers took pains to establish in the Consitituion.

Good for you Mr. Levant for fighting the good fight.  I wish that more men had your guts.

And to think: that loathesome woman - that apparat-chick - goes home every night thinking that she's a good person who's earned her pay, when actually she's just a KGB woman's auxilliary.  To paraphrase Orwell: if you want an image of the future of humanity, it's a human face being smashed over and over again by the sensible shoes of a government-employee soccer-mom.

Posted by: Martin at January 12, 2008 10:52 PM (DRd0Y)

76

Um, Drew,

I'm not saying that you're <em>wrong,</em>   but having having a fucking clue what you're talking about might be helpful in presenting your case.

I can't tell you how entertaining it is to hear American bloggers screaming about "foreign" bloggers commenting on US politics, but you do have to grant us that we at least know that the political parties are Republicans and Democrats.

While you happen to be right about the Steyn / Levant cases, that's only by accident. Levant happens to be a big fan of squelching free speech, he just does it through <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2001/05/17/alliancequebec_010517.html">threatening useless lawsuits</a> That dumb prck is a lawsuit machine!

And I'd be careful about getting anyting from Little Green Footballs. They're not only stupid, they're psychotic.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 12, 2008 10:56 PM (TUjSW)

77 And I'd be careful about getting anyting from Little Green Footballs. They're not only stupid, they're psychotic.

You're serious, aren't you?

Heh. Heheh...hhehehehehehehehehehehee....

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at January 12, 2008 11:15 PM (DQDJU)

78 skippy stalin, LGF is not psychotic.  They are pretty balanced, though they often criticize the misconception that Islam is unproblematic.  You've made a heavy accusation, but I'm pretty sure you won't come back to give some evidence that the bloggers (not some Moby sockpuppet commenter) said something psychotic.

IS what you said about Ezra true?  That he sued someone in the legal system is not proof that he's a bad guy.  Unless he does this often enough to show a pattern, it means nothing, and I also don't have time to determine if he was right or wrong.  All I know is that he was very brave and gave an eloquent explanation of why we must have free speech.  His government is oppressing his rights.  Everyone who chuckles over the whines of white conservatives who note oppresion should take a second and realize,m yeah, it's true, there is unacceptable bullshit going on in societies that should be too good to stand it.  This man has had to spend a lot of time and money defending himself from a government that demands to know his intent when making normal political speech.

You need a sense of perspective.  Also, LGF posted a damn video.  How can you pretend that they aren't to be trusted in this context?  That's absurd; its a video!

Posted by: Gohuckyourself at January 12, 2008 11:38 PM (8dfqL)

79 That guy kicked some ass.

Posted by: LiveFreeOrDie at January 12, 2008 11:49 PM (8v8l+)

80

Additional Blond Agent ,

I consider it something of virtue when commenting on another countries laws and politics to learn something of them. I frequently go to the trouble of learning the names of the political parties concerned. I'm a real pain the ass that way, but it also means that you'll never hear me accusing the Republicans of being in favor of slavery.

As a Canadian, I can tell you chapter and fucking verse about how Human Rights Commisions and what Setctions 318-319 of the Criminal Code of Canada actually mean. Are they idiotic, yes. But the case against them presented here is equallly stupid.

What should piss people off is that Levant isn't being charged with a crime and accordingly, has no right to cute things like counsel or a passive defense. Holocaust deniers are routinely cited under HRC  laws and I don't see a great outcry here or anywhere alse over that.

What LGF, and by extension, AOSHQ is doing is putting up a fucking lawsuit junkie up as a hero because he holds a similiar opinion that Muslims are evil.  Ezra Levant really isn't a hero to anybody. The Western Standard folded because nobody bought it.

The information is actually out there. It just seems as though Charles Johnson and Drew M. are too lazy to look for it.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 12:00 AM (TUjSW)

81

The more well mannered, the more permeatingly stifling the thought police become.

Whatever else he may have done, Levant's stand here is refreshingly bold.

Posted by: St. Paul Plunder at January 13, 2008 12:04 AM (C6SGg)

82 I consider it something of virtue when commenting on another countries laws and politics to learn something of them.

A crushingly ironic statement, considering the rest of your text. Have a good one, Sparky.

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at January 13, 2008 12:06 AM (DQDJU)

83

skippystalin? you are not wrong. you sir are merely a misinformed retarded fucking idiot.

good day!

Posted by: Michael Moore at January 13, 2008 12:13 AM (b0bze)

84

Here's a link that should work to one of the Steyn pieces:

http://tinyurl.com/34yswv

 

Posted by: andycanuck at January 13, 2008 12:13 AM (RTwsr)

85 skippystalin,
That Mr. Levant has sued other people does not negate the fact that it is your speech, sir or madam, that is being stifled by the HRC when Mr. Levant is harangued by these political functionaries.

If you are Canadian it is your fundamental right that is suppressed by these complaints. The fact that you are unable to see that your rights are at stake does not make it any less true. I am happy that the KKK was affirmed to have the right to march in Stokie, Illinois in spite of their repugnant views. To view the world otherwise is distinctly anti-liberal (in the classical sense) and distinctly offensive to Americans, writ large.

Posted by: Nom de Blog at January 13, 2008 12:41 AM (ThZCx)

86 Levant may in fact be a dick. You're right, I don't know, nor do I know Canadian law. What I do know is that in this particular case, he's dead right, and bravo to him for showing what "truth to power" really means. 

One question: if Levant isn't being charged with a crime, what is the penalty if he loses?

 

 

Posted by: Dr. Remulak at January 13, 2008 12:53 AM (q7lYK)

87

Okay, I'll try this again in ways that don't involve your idiot hero - who by the way, the Conservative Party of Canada jettisoned long ago.

At the time that the Western Standard published the Muhammad cartoons, they were already widely viewed. The fact that they were wee being censored already made them widely seen pretty much  everywhere.

Because of Canada's laws regarding hate speech and various human rights tibunials, Candian papers dodn't run them. But them, most American media outlets, uninhinited by such laws, didn't either. Why is that?

I actually agree that the cartoons should be published, but I also know the risks that Ezra Levant was taking in publishing them. I, and Levant, know that there is no First Amendment in Canada. As the publisher of a magazine, I also presume thast he was aware of the existience of Human Rights Tribuanals.

Ezra was looking for trouble and he found it. Indeed, if he hadn't, he wouldn't be a topic of discussion here, would he?

Ezra Levant saw what worked for Ernst Zundel and ran with it. Sure, his magazine failed and everything, but it'll get him on TV and a bunc of blogs.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 12:56 AM (TUjSW)

88 Hey Skippy, click the link that andycanuck provided and read what you fellow Canadian said  about  the  HRC.   And quit taking the name of commie thugs, it's just pathetic.

Posted by: Mark in Spokane at January 13, 2008 12:57 AM (T++Q8)

89 I may hate what you say, but I will defend your right to say it.

Remember that, leftists? Or are you so in the thrall now of thoughtcrime non-law that you can't think straight anymore?

Please master, I am most reasonable, please let me off the hook....

Posted by: lauraw at January 13, 2008 01:05 AM (DbybK)

90 One question: if Levant isn't being charged with a crime, what is the penalty if he loses?

Dr. Remulak,

According to this article that Levant wrote:

And the punishments that these commissions can order are bizarre. Besides fines to the government and payments to complainants, defendants can be forced to "apologize" for having unacceptable political or religious opinions.


An apology might not sound onerous, yet it is far more troubling than a fine. Ordering a person -- or a magazine -- to say or publish words that they don't believe is an Orwellian act of thought control. The editor of Maclean's, Ken Whyte, maintains his magazine is fair. But human rights commissions have the power to order him to publish a confession that he's a bigot -- or, as in one Ontario case, even order someone to study Islam. Even convicted murderers cannot be "ordered" to apologize.

You know, reeducation light type stuff.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 13, 2008 01:07 AM (hlYel)

91

skippy- you sound like you have some personal animosity towards ezra levant.

 

put that aside and look hard at the issue.

it's all about free speech. you either support the concept or not.

me? i could give a fuck either way whether you backbacon eating hoser losers are hassled by your authorities.

it's your country and i's glad i dont live there.

 

Posted by: hoppygoerring at January 13, 2008 01:09 AM (b0bze)

92

Mark,

Okay, so I read it. I'm already familiar with Canadian law, and I think that I've made it pretty clear that I disagree with it. What's your point?

As much as I much as I may disagree with it, I do understand that it has been upheld by votes of  the people over and over again. Keep in mind that this is the Alberta Human Rights Code  that's going after Levant, not Canada's. And Alberta is far and away Canada's most conservative province. In fact, between the Social Credit Part and the Conservatives, I don't think that Alberta has has had a liberal government since before he Depression.

I may not like the law, but the people of Alberta have had endless opportunities to overturn it. They didn't.

But there's a lot of oil there and Canada does have WMD technology, maybe you can invade and fix things for us.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 01:18 AM (TUjSW)

93 Forest for the trees, Skippuh, forest for the trees...

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at January 13, 2008 01:23 AM (DQDJU)

94 Drew, thank you.

We have a case similar to this here in Philly. You may have heard of Joe Vento, the cheesesteak guy who has a sign at his business requesting  that customers order in English. The Philadelphia Human Relations Commission dragged him into a hearing because they think the sign is discriminatory. They can fine him, or order him into sensitivity training. Maybe we shouldn't be so hard on Canada.

Posted by: Dr. Remulak at January 13, 2008 01:32 AM (q7lYK)

95 Maybe we shouldn't be so hard on Canada.

No, we should be harder on the Orwellian assholes in this country.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 13, 2008 01:35 AM (hlYel)

96

Hoppy,

I really couldn't give a shit about Ezra, and remember, I SUPPORT his right to publish the stupid cartoons.

What you don't seem to underatand is that there isn't an absolute right to free speech in Canada. It just doesn't exist. Google the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, if you're really that interested. I have to watch what I say on my stupid blog every day. Christ, it's illegal for me to even talk about jury deliberations in Canada.And I have a really cool jury duty story that I'd love to tell. But I'd go jail for two years if I did.

Trust me, son, I know all about free speech limitations in my home and native land. So does Ezra Levant.

But just because I think the law is stupid doesn't give you an excuse to break it. Let's say you think drug laws are dumb. Do you get away with selling a pound of heroin to an undercover cop?

I don't think that Ezra should get any more lenient treatment than anybody else in Canada. Laws are laws and I remember a time when that acrually meant something to conservatives.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 01:35 AM (TUjSW)

97 Well then skippy,  I hope you will enjoy your future in canukeistan.  I will live in the land of the free and the home of the brave. I won't be visiting.

Posted by: Mark in Spokane at January 13, 2008 01:42 AM (T++Q8)

98

skippy,

that sucks. maybe....

dont blog under your real name?

use a proxy server?

stick it to the MAN man!!

 

Posted by: hoppygoerring at January 13, 2008 01:52 AM (b0bze)

99 Something tells me that if Levant was a lefty, he would be hailed and defended for his "civil disobedience".


Posted by: Dr. Remulak at January 13, 2008 01:55 AM (q7lYK)

100

Mark,

Again, you miss my point in the most spectacular way. I'm not defending the law, I'm just telling you what it is. If it were up to me, I'd destroy the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and adopt your Bill of Rights.

I disagree with any number of American laws. That doesn't stop me from visiting and liking the American people. If you can't do the same, okay. Your dollar has kind of fallen to shit anyway. Besides, why do you think that your oil is coming from these days? Silly things like human rights never mattered when it came to the energy market before, why should it now?

Furhtermore, I find "canukeistan" insulting. Firstly, it's spelled wrong, and secondly, I'm not spelling "America" with three k's, am I?

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 01:56 AM (TUjSW)

101

Hoppy,

Actually, I'm not using a proxy server. I'm way to dumb for that. My ISP should show Rogers in Toronto.

Secondly, being criticized for writing under a pseudonym at a site whose author is paranoid about anonymity only proves that you're a fucking idiot.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 02:03 AM (TUjSW)

102 I'm not defending the law, I'm just telling you what it is.

So skippy, what are you doing about it? At least Levant is fighting a legal regime you admit is flawed (to say the least).  Your point seems to be 'well the law sucks but it's the law so what can we do about it?" 

That's whats got people so riled up after watching Levant, he's actually fighting back. He saying, 'this is wrong and I will not submit to it'. That's what free people do when confronted with unjust laws until they can build support to change them, they fight. They raise a stink. They build an argument and enlist support.

In America we have a long list of heroes like the Founding Fathers, the abolitionists and civil rights leaders who we honor because they said, 'no, this is wrong and must change'.

Instead of complaining that Levant knows the limitations on freedom in your country yet dares to flaunt them, why don't you get off your ass and support him (or some one you find more politically palatable) in trying to change those limits? 

Who knows, maybe the world won't be forever deprived of hearing your jury story.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 13, 2008 02:08 AM (hlYel)

103 Joanie, I'm with you; if I were single, we would be fighting over him.

Warden we are always of like mind. Buy this man a drink-for life!

Captkidney, I was thinking the same thing; once the answer does not matter the interview should be over.

Question: Are the Canadians who watched this video embarrassed about this sham?


Posted by: mary at January 13, 2008 02:09 AM (ZJ22h)

104 It was supposed to in insulting.  You are at the aoshq. We do insults.

Posted by: Mark in Spokane at January 13, 2008 02:09 AM (T++Q8)

105 Furhtermore, I find "canukeistan" insulting. Firstly, it's spelled wrong, and secondly, I'm not spelling "America" with three k's, am I?

No, but swallowing the (long disproved) canard that "IT'S ALL ABOUT THE OOOOOOOOOOOIL!" is doing nothing to help your case against Levant.

Not that I am convinced, anyway.  As far as I could tell looking at the 1960 Bill of Rights and the 1986 Charter, yes, Canada does have freedom of speech.  And I think that, when basic human rights such as freedom of speech are violated, civil disobedience is indeed called for.  If it was good enough for Martin Luther King, Jr. for similar injustices, I'm pretty sure it's appropriate here.

Posted by: Basilisk at January 13, 2008 02:14 AM (rwr5K)

106 Hey, skippy, do you think Rosa Parks "went looking for trouble"?

You sound like you're pissed that you obey the dictates of the apparat, and Ezra doesn't. Don't hate him just because he's not as pusillanimous as you.

But just because I think the law is stupid doesn't give you an excuse to break it. Let's say you think drug laws are dumb. Do you get away with selling a pound of heroin to an undercover cop.

Did you just compare publishing a dozen cartoons to selling heroin to a cop? Can't you see the difference?

Ezra: Canada should protect my free speech. Skippystalin: Canada should, but then again it shouldn't because it currently doesn't and Ezra's a jerk.

Ezra has the better argument.

Posted by: caspera at January 13, 2008 02:18 AM (kuj/I)

107 "I may hate what you say, but I will defend your right to say it.  Remember that, leftists?

Posted by: lauraw at January 13, 2008 01:05 AM (DbybK)"

The political left has never, ever, believed that.  Regardless what they say, they believe that only they have a right to free speech.

Posted by: Martin at January 13, 2008 02:18 AM (DRd0Y)

108 Instead of complaining that Levant knows the limitations on freedom in your country yet dares to flaunt them, why don't you get off your ass and support him (or some one you find more politically palatable) in trying to change those limits?

The money quote right there.  "Free speech for me but none for thee" is one of the commandments of the Far Left.  Even moderately left-leaning Canadians I've read on all the sites featuring this story have come together to denounce this stupidity.  You have to be a special kind of despot or useful idiot to support this mockery of free society.

Posted by: Basilisk at January 13, 2008 02:19 AM (rwr5K)

109

Drew,

That's what I love most about America. For real.

What I can't seem to get you to understand is that the province under whose Human Rights Code Ezra is being persecuted is, far and way, the most conservative in Canada. Where I'm from, Albertans are called "Americans by proxy."

Honest to god, I wish that we were more like you in that regard. i've voted against them every chance I've had, but expaining how that works would involve a fourteen hour tutorial on Candian history that I'm sure no one here has the patience for.

Look, I'm a foreigner who doesn't especially like America's drug laws. But if I break them, I don't expect a fucking parade of Americans demanding that I be allowed to sell smack on your streets.

From time to time, a Canadian citizen does somethinhing incredibly stupid and gets senttenced to death there. Americans, when they know that we're doing it, get really pissed off when the Candian government demands clemency for him.

I detest the law here, but the people have had numerous oppotunities to vote on it. Just as yours have.

Asa citizen of Ontario, I don't get a vote on Albeta's Human Rights Commission. I also don't get a vote on your drug laws or death penalty.

Precisely what gives you, me, or anyone here the right to undermine the rights of the people of Alberta to execute their laws as they see fit?

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 02:32 AM (TUjSW)

110 skippy, are you saying the Alberta Human Rights, Citizenship and Multicultural Act overrides Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights? Really?

Your provisional argument was exactly the same kind of argument made here in the states during the 50's and 60's.  But you know what? People from all over this country went to places in Alabama and Mississippi and say, 'we don't care if this is how you want to do things in your state. It's not how we do things in our country, so change.'

But okay, you don't want to get involved in Alberta's issues. What about the Steyn case? That was filed with the B.C. commission and the national commission.  Are you doing something about that?

And forget about Levant, what are you doing about the fact you can not publish certain things? Are you standing up and fighting to change that ridiculous law?

Aren't you embarrassed that a blog in Minnesota (Captain's Quarters) was ahead of any Canadian news outlet in covering the 'sponsorship scandal' because of your country's idiotic laws?  What did you do about that?

More importantly, if you don't see the difference between enforcing drug laws and the exercise of fundamental rights dating back hundreds of years, you're really not worth engaging. If you continue to make that ridiculous comparison, I am going to have to ask you to learn the difference between apples and oranges before continuing to respond to you.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 13, 2008 02:50 AM (hlYel)

111 Skippy, when in the Declaration of Independence T.J. said "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."  Now this is a problem if you don't believe one.  I do not know what you believe but that is where is comes from. 

Posted by: Mark in Spokane at January 13, 2008 02:57 AM (T++Q8)

112 A puzzling guy, this Levant.  One the one hand, clearly a man.  On the other, obviously Canadian.  I can only assume he'll be heading south one day.

Posted by: VRWC Agent at January 13, 2008 03:15 AM (Z3AmO)

113

Not that I am convinced, anyway.  As far as I could tell looking at the 1960 Bill of Rights and the 1986 Charter, yes, Canada does have freedom of speech.  And I think that, when basic human rights such as freedom of speech are violated, civil disobedience is indeed called for.  If it was good enough for Martin Luther King, Jr. for similar injustices, I'm pretty sure it's appropriate here.

Actually, the Charter was ratified im 1982, not 1986. And I think publishing cartoons, which were already widely widely available is rather different than the right to vote or equal protection under the law. It also demostrates that you haven't read Section 1 of the Charter, which reads "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

Loosely translated, that means "You have these rights until we decide that you don't." The United States never had the War Powers Act or the National Emergency Act either, so I really don't exzpect you to understand.

Hey, skippy, do you think Rosa Parks "went looking for trouble"?

Actually, yes. I think she did go looking for trouble. And she was willing to suffer the consequences of it. Her conviction was such that she didn't run to the arms of foreigners for cormfort when things didn't - as she knew they wouldn't - go her way.

Did you just compare publishing a dozen cartoons to selling heroin to a cop? Can't you see the difference?

As a matter of fact, I do. Heroin and cartoons are both a personal choice as to what you consume. Criminalizing eithter is what makes them scary or dangerous.

And I think that, when basic human rights such as freedom of speech are violated, civil disobedience is indeed called for.  If it was good enough for Martin Luther King, Jr. for similar injustices, I'm pretty sure it's appropriate here.

And that's why the GOP was so up on springing MLK from the joint? As I remember my history, it was Bobby Kennedy who made that phone call. And that, as I know my rules of the bar, was cause for his disbarment.

Free speech for me but none for thee" is one of the commandments of the Far Left.  Even moderately left-leaning Canadians I've read on all the sites featuring this story have come together to denounce this stupidity.  You have to be a special kind of despot or useful idiot to support this mockery of free society.

I actually think that Human Rights Commissions and hate crimes laws are a special kind of stupid myself.  However, the citizens of that jurisdiction thought enough of them to repeatedly reelect the most conservatve government in Canadian history to uphold and strengthen them.

What you're protesting is the equivalent of "states rights," which don't actually exist in Canada at all. We actually have a federal Criminal Code. What makes HRCs especially osidious is that they exist outside of the criminal law. Changing that involves changes over 700 years of British common law.

Ezra: Canada should protect my free speech. Skippystalin: Canada should, but then again it shouldn't because it currently doesn't and Ezra's a jerk.

 Whether I agree with Ezra or not is immaterial. The question is "did he knowingly place himself in legal jeoprardy?" The fact is that he put up the cartoons practically INVITING prosecution.

Frankly, I'm amazed that conservatives can suddenly get to question the laws decided upon by a democratic society.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 03:16 AM (TUjSW)

114 The political left has never, ever, believed that. Regardless what they say, they believe that only they have a right to free speech.

Complaining endlessly at broadcast microphones about the elusive chill wind.

Posted by: topsecretk9 at January 13, 2008 03:16 AM (8TtKR)

115 Precisely what gives you, me, or anyone here the right to undermine the rights of the people of Alberta to execute their laws as they see fit?

Stone the raped Iranian women to death ---> it's not my place to protest*** the draconian, abusive treatment of humans as it's not my place to undermine the rights of a people to execute their draconian, abusive laws as they see fit!

Tell that to the Canadian Iman's please.

***protest, being the operative word

Posted by: topsecretk9 at January 13, 2008 03:25 AM (8TtKR)

116 Frankly, I'm amazed that conservatives can suddenly get to question the laws decided upon by a democratic society.

Skippy,

That means that you are either very easily amazed or know very little about what it means to be a modern conservative.  My guess is they are not mutually exclusive in your case.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 13, 2008 03:27 AM (hlYel)

117 If there comes a day that a majority of Americans no longer believe in freedom of speech and allow laws to circumvent it, fuck 'it. The right precedes and post-dates government, majority, process or otherwise.

Posted by: MlR at January 13, 2008 03:33 AM (w/YO4)

118 You seem to be missing the bigger issue here skipy. It's not just that these laws exists but how they are enforced.

According to Section 22(1)(a) of the Alberta Human Rights, Citizenship and Multicultural Act, the Commission Director may, "dismiss a complaint if the director considers that the complaint is without merit".

The fact that this complaint is considered in the least bit meritorious shows that the people enforcing this law do not have even a passing familiarity with western political heritage. Or is there some mysterious part of Canadian culture that grants people the right not to be insulted by the news of the day?  Or in this particular case is there an anti-blasphemy statute that was passed while no one was looking?

Are you as a citizen of another province some how forbidden or duty bound not to take notice of this gross miscarriage of justice?

I guess that's one of the differences between being a subject of your sovereign and living in a republic. You poor bastards.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 13, 2008 03:41 AM (hlYel)

119

Drew,

What I'm saying that is that pretty much EVERYTHING in the Charter is overridden by the language in Section 1. Remember, "as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society" is pretty goddamn broad language.

If that isn't good enough for you, I invite you to peruse secrion 15.2." Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability." That negates your Fourteenth Amendment rather nicely.

Failing that, we have the infamous Notwithstanding Clause, 33. (1) Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15 of this Charter. Operation of exception    (2) An Act or a provision of an Act in respect of which a declaration made under this section is in effect shall have such operation as it would have but for the provision of this Charter referred to in the declaration. Five year limitation    (3) A declaration made under subsection (1) shall cease to have effect five years after it comes into force or on such earlier date as may be specified in the declaration. Re-enactment    (4) Parliament or the legislature of a province may re-enact a declaration made under subsection (1). Five year limitation    (5) Subsection (3) applies in respect of a re-enactment made under subsection (4).

Let's say that the Charter applied when Brown v. Board of Education was decided. The state of Kansas would have been been well within their legal rights rights to say "So the fuck what, Supreme Court?" And that would, under the Charter, have been the law ... "So the fuck what" 

 Segregation wouldn't have ended under the Charter. How's that for "liberal?"

In fact that's happening now. It's actuallty illegal to have a commericial sign in English outside of an establishment in Quebec.

So, PLEASE don't pretend that Thomas Paine's Rights of Man apply here. They don't. And Ezra Levant knows that, too. That's what got him kicked out of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 03:44 AM (TUjSW)

120 Frankly, I'm amazed that conservatives can suddenly get to question the laws decided upon by a democratic society.

You don't have a Second Amendment either, eh?  Too bad.  Questioning the law is a bit of a conservative tradition in these parts.

Posted by: VRWC Agent at January 13, 2008 03:46 AM (Z3AmO)

121 So, PLEASE don't pretend that Thomas Paine's Rights of Man apply here. They don't. And Ezra Levant knows that, too. That's what got him kicked out of the Conservative Party of Canada.

And this is why you will be living in Canunkistan soon. We will be keeping Western Civilization going without you. 

Posted by: Mark in Spokane at January 13, 2008 03:49 AM (T++Q8)

122 skippy,

A couple of points and then I am off to bed

-Canada is even more fucked than I thought.

-I really don't ever want to hear from another Canadian how morally superior your country and culture is, especially compared to horrible and brutish US.

And

-I still admire Levant for trying to change a sick culture. It's better to stand up and fight for what you know is right than to sit on the sidelines and sulk about it.  Maybe if more of you did that you'd find your own Thomas Paine (of course we imported the original ourselves from England but you know what I mean).

Posted by: DrewM. at January 13, 2008 03:53 AM (hlYel)

123

You don't have a Second Amendment either, eh?  Too bad.  Questioning the law is a bit of a conservative tradition in these parts.

Actually it really isn't. If somebody like President Bush sauntered into the Constitutional Convention with something like the USA PATRIOT ACT, the Founding Fathers  probably would have stomped him to death in their pointy shoes.

And didn't the Supreme Court start limiting the Second Amendment in the 1930's?

I haven't spent 25 years studying a Consititution that isn't mine for no reason,  I'm actually scared that your country, which I really do have a deep love for, is heading in same direction as mine. But there are nasty counter-forces fighting back that are taking away ftrom Constitutional principles in the opposite direction.

If you want to get really scared, I invite you to read the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the amended USA PATRIOT ACT side by side.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 04:06 AM (TUjSW)

124 Frankly, it's a miracle that I'm ever in relationships at all. I'm ugly, stupid, broke, and have a truly shitty personality.

And that is why you do not understand America.

By the way, I pulled it of his blog.

Posted by: Mark in Spokane at January 13, 2008 04:19 AM (T++Q8)

125 If somebody like President Bush sauntered into the Constitutional Convention with something like the USA PATRIOT ACT, the Founding Fathers  probably would have stomped him to death in their pointy shoes.

Which provisions would have offended them and what makes you think so?

And didn't the Supreme Court start limiting the Second Amendment in the 1930's?

As for Second Amendment jurisprudence, I invite you to look for yourself.  Relax, there is very little reading involved.  The "big" case was from the 30's and IIRC only held that, given what "the Militia" was, covered weapons should have some rational connection with legitimate military applications.

I haven't spent 25 years studying a Consititution that isn't mine for no reason

You may have a year or two to go, but I appreciate the effort.  The left wing politics that have sapped and neutered your country do not flourish quite so aggressively here, but they are a common enemy and if they ever do manage to prevail here it will be a dark day for mankind.

Posted by: VRWC Agent at January 13, 2008 04:21 AM (Z3AmO)

126

-Canada is even more fucked than I thought

I couldn't agree more. I'm just trying to play Joe Friday here. Just the facts regarding how things works here. Feel free to check the constitutional text and case law if you get bored.

The only reason I can't support the death penalty in Canada is the right of the Crown to appeal endlessly. Bitch as much as you do about O.J, I'd prefer to think of him walking the streets than the people we would have killed after three trials, only to be proven innnocent by DNA.

And that brings me to a particularly important point. While I support the American death penaty, an overwhelming majority of Canadian don't. And you people get awfully fucking uppity when we meddle in your laws, so I think it's the better part of neighborliness that you don't meddle in ours.

Yes, Canadians DO act morally superior to Americans, and I've been fighting against that all of my life. You can imagine how popular this makes me with my countrymen. And I don't think that I've conducted myself that way here

You don't like us getting involved in the way you adminster justice. Guess what? We're not thrilled when you get involved in ours. I don't have to like my countries laws, but I do reserve the right to get pissed when you tell me how it should be done. Especially when I know that you're you're already right.

But the rest of the world doesn't work off of a neat flag, a cool theme song and the notion that you know best.

 

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 04:36 AM (TUjSW)

127 Precisely what gives you, me, or anyone here the right to undermine the rights of the people of Alberta to execute their laws as they see fit?''

Commenting on current events is now undermining the rights of the people of Alberta? Then I suggest you remove all the crap you have on your own shitty blog about American laws.  Besides exposing you as a hypocrite, it demonstrates how little you know.

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 13, 2008 04:42 AM (mJpMx)

128

Mark,

I wasn't going to point this out, but you have certain inalienable rights, not unalienable ones, you putz. I wasn't going to correct you on your own Declaration of Independence, but since you decided that my blog was fair game, so is your idiocy.

And being lectured on freedom by someone from Spokane is particularly pricesless. I'd have to check with Maria Cantrell, but I'm pretty sure that Washington is Canada's 13th province and/or territory.

 By the way, my exes in California and Michigan seemed to enjoy my company. Granted, they didn't enjoy it for very long, because I'm a scumbag.

VRWC,

Probably the part that demands that the states conform to federal standards on local pharmacies selling fucking cold medicine. That was included in the 2005v re-authorization bill.

Oh, and how a bill that that was suppoased to be only "used to fight terrorism" is now being used in tax cases against titty-bar owners could be seen as objectionable, too. Christ, I can't wait fot it to be used in a gun case. That'll make me smile.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 05:06 AM (TUjSW)

129
He's a synopsis of some of the attacks on speech and thought in canuckistan.

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 13, 2008 05:14 AM (mJpMx)

130

Chop Suey Palace (R),

I might be wrong, but I think you have a crush on me. Your lips may say no, but your cold, hard kung-fu eyes say yes.

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 05:25 AM (TUjSW)

131
I'm not a faggot. Now go file a complaint, asshole.

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 13, 2008 05:34 AM (mJpMx)

132 Skippy: 

So it would be a fairly trivial part of the statute which is more relevant to the FDA than security that has your knickers in a knot?  If so, out founders would have been rioting over Commerce Clause jurisprudence rather than anything integral to the PATRIOT Act.  I'm a small government guy myself, but your idea that the Framers would be rioting over a tweak to the FDA - rather than the FDA itself - strikes me as ill considered..

I didn't think you had anything thoughtful on that point but I wanted to give you a chance to show off those 25 years of study.  Thanks for playing.

Posted by: VRWC Agent at January 13, 2008 05:37 AM (Z3AmO)

133

Frankly, I'm pissed that Mark in Spokane quoted me in saying that I'm "ugly, stupid, broke, and have a truly shitty personality." but neglected to mention my fourteen inch cock.

Since Spokane is too far away to punch him in the pussy, I might have to change teams on the War in Terror.

That's right, I might just join the "skins"

Posted by: skippystalin at January 13, 2008 05:39 AM (TUjSW)

134 I wasn't going to point this out, but you have certain inalienable rights, not unalienable ones, you putz.

Actually, it's unalienable. Here's the text:

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

Here's a high resolution image:

http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/charters_downloads.html

Third word, fourth line.

Think before you speak.

Posted by: WisdomLover at January 13, 2008 05:48 AM (YGMaD)

135 BTW "Think before you speak" is just a piece of good advice.

skippystalin might want to construe it as a legislative recommendation.

Posted by: WisdomLover at January 13, 2008 05:53 AM (YGMaD)

136

But the rest of the world doesn't work off of a neat flag, a cool theme song and the notion that you know best.

It's a bit more than a theme song, Beaver-Boy.  And I think you'll find that our "notions" carry a bit more weight globally than the latest word from Thunder Bay.

We won't even mention just to whom the phrase "we stand on guard for thee" in your little national ditty actually refers, and pretty much has for the last sixty years.

Please, resume eating your poutine in your customary passive-aggressive manner, have a good swig of maple syrup to top it off, and leave the serious discussion to the grown-ups, eh?

 

Posted by: A. Pendragon at January 13, 2008 06:14 AM (OUMAR)

137 Actually, it's unalienable.

Yes, no American can be turned into an alien without his consent.

Let's look at Skippy's arguments:

1) Levant threatened a libel lawsuit against a fellow who may have libeled someone.
Is that relevant to the merits of his statements in the post? No.
Does a libel lawsuit imply hypocrisy on issues of free speech? No.

2) Canada doesn't have free speech.
That's too bad, but it still doesn't weaken Levant's stand on a moral basis. Naturally we as Americans applaud him standing up for what we believe is his natural right. Where exactly is the issue here?

3) "Holocaust deniers are routinely cited under HRC  laws"
I remember that one guy, but only that one guy (Ernst Zundel), who was cited. And there were many posts decrying his position but supporting his right to express his lame opinions.

4) Levant is a "lawsuit machine."
Levant threatened a single lawsuit back in 2001, but apparently didn't follow through. Are there other lawsuits that haven't been brought to our attention? As a "lawsuit machine" he seems to have a poor record.

5) "Silly things like human rights never mattered when it came to the energy market before, why should it now?"
What an asshole.

Posted by: geoff at January 13, 2008 06:37 AM (GE0+y)

138 Precisely what gives you, me, or anyone here the right to undermine the rights of the people of Alberta to execute their laws as they see fit?

Sure thing. I guess that lack of free speech in Canada is more insidious than I thought - now simply stating our opinion is "undermining rights." Yet Caneukiastanianitianiums are free to criticize the US, without fear of affecting our rights. Let me go one step further and undermine Skippy's rights in particular - that is an abysmally stupid argument.

Posted by: geoff at January 13, 2008 06:47 AM (GE0+y)

139

Since Spokane is too far away to punch him in the pussy, I might have to change teams on the War in Terror.

That's right, I might just join the "skins" 

You have already  joined the skins  you  just  don't  know it. Hope you like dhimmitude.


Posted by: Mark in Spokane at January 13, 2008 06:54 AM (T++Q8)

140 14 inch cock?

Posted by: Tom at January 13, 2008 10:12 AM (B1NVJ)

141

You know, for all the complaining people do around here about "poor quality trolls", here we have a guy that is informed, engaging, and even witty -- and he's not even a troll -- and he gets moron rolled for, what, not "taking to the streets" to protest Canada's idiotic Orwellian thought crimes?

Weren't we just saying the other day that such gestures were pointless acts of self-gratification?  Are we really expecting every Joe Citizen under the soft bootheel of dhimmi Canada to join the Wolverines or forever be mocked as a poseur?  Didn't skippy already express his opposition to the pseudo-laws in question in a way to suggest that he's used his role in the democratic process to oppose them?

It would be one thing if the guy came here bitching and moaning about what a horrible, horrible place Canada is or, worse yet, what a morally superior utopia it was.  Then I could see the need for a takedown.  But from what I can tell, his primary intent is to inform us of just how messed up the concepts of Canadian law and rights are and in the context of the thread topic.  It's a service, is it not?  One that we've asked for in the past?

Yeah, his "blood for oil" and "energy markets" bullshit was idiotic, and his heroin dealing = publishing cartoons argument is absurd.  But a bunch of posters here are trashing his home country for reasons with which he agrees and then rebutting his agreement with "Yeah, your shithole country blows, douchebag.  Grab a sign and start picketing like a member of DUAC ya pussy."

Posted by: VJay at January 13, 2008 11:21 AM (kico6)

142 Steyn , who for those of you didn't know , used to work for Ezra .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 13, 2008 11:31 AM (Bivii)

143 Meh , any one who lives in Moronto needs a good rolling now and then . Bunch of fucking commies , the lot of them .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 13, 2008 11:36 AM (Bivii)

144
Vjay: Puleez! He shows up and the first thing out of his mouth is an insult to the poster, and insult to LGF, and a very hypocritical comment that people should not blog about other countries and their laws unless they, according to his opinion, know what they are talking about. Fuck canada! 

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 13, 2008 11:51 AM (mJpMx)

145 Naaah actually I found Skippy to be marginally alright. A little off, but he's Canadian, eh?

Stripping away the useless and absurd parts, it looks to me like he was saying that Ezra's commentary wasn't applicable, or was out of proportion, to the case at hand. Not saying I agree you understand.

The test might be this: Does Ezra have the right to apply a counter-claim to the same HRC? And should he?

One could grant, in fairness, that he can. He shouldn't because doing so confirms the HRC as the responsible adjudicating party.

I'd like to read Skippy's thoughts on that. If he shouldn't do so, as a point of basic freedom, then Ezra's complaints become far more legit, do they not?

Posted by: urthshu at January 13, 2008 12:17 PM (bFqDX)

146

The test might be this: Does Ezra have the right to apply a counter-claim to the same HRC? And should he?

As far as I know , yes . These HRC's have the right to dismiss complaints without merit ( at their discression of course ) . The shitty part of this whole farce is that the complaintant doesn't have to spend a dime , the defendant  though has to spend plenty on his/her defense . The really , realy shitty part is (to the best of my knowledge )  that once these things get this far , no defendant has won ................yet .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 13, 2008 12:27 PM (Bivii)

147
I don't think he can file a complaint or counter complaint unless he argues that he is a member of a protected minority recognize by these phony tribunals and that his feelings were hurt. 

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 13, 2008 12:33 PM (mJpMx)

148  
. . . member of a protected minority recognized by these phony tribunals . . .

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 13, 2008 12:35 PM (mJpMx)

149 Weren't we just saying the other day that such gestures were pointless acts of self-gratification?  Are we really expecting every Joe Citizen under the soft bootheel of dhimmi Canada to join the Wolverines or forever be mocked as a poseur?

VJay,

Yes, skippy admits the problems with Canada and on several occasions admits he'd prefer an American style bill of rights.

My problem with him is that he keeps saying Levant knew this would have been the outcome of publishing the cartoons and shouldn't take this opportunity to rail against the Canadian system. Skippy may not want to join the Wolverines but don't bad mouth or diminish those that have.

Sometimes someone has to rail to change things and I don't think people around here think protests are always futile or idiotic. I submit the Harriet Meyers' nomination and last summers' craptastic immigration fight for your consideration. And in the greater scheme of things those two issues aren't nearly as important as the right of a magazine publisher to not have to answer to the government for "offending" someone.

If Canada is going to reclaim it's heritage, it's going to need people like skippy to stand up for it. If people like him are not only willing to quietly accept what's happening but join in the pile on on those who are fighting back, they are well and truly screwed.

Besides, skippy doesn't strike me as the type to object to a good knock about. In fact, I am pretty sure he rather enjoys it. Now, if he'd focus more on the people in his own country who he admits are wrong instead of people who would most likely be his allies in that fight it would be better for everyone.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 13, 2008 01:15 PM (hlYel)

150 I'm actually scared that your country, which I really do have a deep love for, is heading in same direction as mine.

You mean, toward becoming another smelly little socialist shithole?

I can't disagree with that.

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 13, 2008 01:24 PM (zTfCf)

151 If Canada is going to reclaim it's heritage, it's going to need people like skippy to stand up for it. If people like him are not only willing to quietly accept what's happening but join in the pile on on those who are fighting back, they are well and truly screwed. Yep. "First they came for the loudmouthed cretins, but I didn't say anything because I didn't want to associate myself with loudmouthed cretins - Are you kidding? what would the neighbors think? - I thought...."

Posted by: urthshu at January 13, 2008 01:27 PM (bFqDX)

152

See, the problem here is this Skippy fellow thinks he has a point. He does not.

It's like listening to some whiney kid bitch and moan about how horrible it is 'he has to go to work'.

You don't like us getting involved in the way you adminster justice. Guess what? We're not thrilled when you get involved in ours. I don't have to like my countries laws, but I do reserve the right to get pissed when you tell me how it should be done.

Well, then, definetly don't become an American. That's our gig, man. Europe, Canada, even ass backward Saudi fuckin Arabia, everyone not only knows how to run our country better then us, they also frequently demand the right to vote in our elections so they can actually do so.

But the rest of the world doesn't work off of a neat flag, a cool theme song and the notion that you know best.

No, they work off a neat flag, a cool theme song, and the notion that they know what's best. 

You're upset because Americans are criticizing Canada's legal system and laws?

Suck. It. Up.

Jesus fuckin christ...a Canadian complaining about foreign criticisms....talk about audacity...and irony...

Posted by: Entropy at January 13, 2008 01:27 PM (HgAV0)

153

BTW, being a government bureaucrat myself, this set of vids really stuck in my craw.

There certainly is a banality to evil. I'm very sure the civil servant here believes in what she is doing, believes that she does good in the world. And I'm likewise sure that Ezra's arguments are being dismissed even as he makes them to her - they're simply not regarded as germane to her task.

As they say, the wheels of bureaucracy grind exceedingly fine. I can see fairly well how this is going to fall out for Ezra, because its fairly easy for me to put on my bureaucrat cap: Watch the vids again, see when she scribbles upon her pad and when she doesn't - his arguments are only so much folderol to her - but she writes down that he means to offend, that he's defiant, etc. She's only scribbling out what's useful to her and her report, which she is duty-bound to provide regardless.

His only choice will be to fight out in a higher court.

Posted by: urthshu at January 13, 2008 01:42 PM (bFqDX)

154 "I'm just trying to play Joe Friday here. Just the facts regarding how things works here." -- skippystaling above @ 126

And I'm here to explain the facts of subject/verb agreement.

Posted by: Nom de Blog at January 13, 2008 01:50 PM (ThZCx)

155 damned extra g

Posted by: Nom de Blog at January 13, 2008 01:59 PM (ThZCx)

156 So, PLEASE don't pretend that Thomas Paine's Rights of Man apply here. They don't.

Then you completely miss the point of Thomas Paine's Rights of Man:
“It is a perversion of terms to say that a charter gives rights. It operates by a contrary effect - that of taking rights away. "Rights are inherently in all the inhabitants; but charters, by annulling those rights, in the majority, leave the right, by exclusion, in the hands of a few.

Now, it's one thing if you disagree with his argument. But it contradicts your other statement that "I haven't spent 25 years studying a Consititution that isn't mine for no reason,  I'm actually scared that your country, which I really do have a deep love for, is heading in same direction as mine."

This isn't some minor aspect of American culture, it's the core of the American system. And it's a shame that in 25 years you still haven't learned that.

Had the people of the original colonies shared your outlook, we would have never have had the Constitution in the first place. That's some "deep love" you've got there.

Posted by: dorkafork at January 13, 2008 01:59 PM (kErJj)

157 urthshu: I was looking at when she scribbled, too. As to appeals,  I found on the internet where someone appealed the verdict of one of these tribunals and lost. I can't find the link now. I'm not sure if the party then had the option to appeal it to the next higher court. Even if they could, after a while, there are costs to consider and they may have opted out.  Here in the states, there would be numerous amicus briefs and people/organizations pitching in. I think canada has achieved total dhimmitude. As others have pointed out, it means nothing if you object to a law but do nothing about it  -- especially, when it involves something so basic as freedom of speech.  

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 13, 2008 02:06 PM (mJpMx)

158

All right, so maybe I went a little hard on you morons in a prudish scold kinda way.  Call it Tom/tommy/erg/seymore/elfballs/Weaver/Munck fatigue.

Posted by: VJay at January 13, 2008 02:15 PM (kico6)

159 "Hey, skippy, do you think Rosa Parks "went looking for trouble"?

Posted by: caspera at January 13, 2008 02:18 AM (kuj/I)"

As a matter of fact, she did.  The episode on the bus was planned by the NAACP as a means of challenging the policy of segregation on city buses.  Rosa Parks herself had been trained at the communist affiliated Highlander Folk school in Tennessee.

Posted by: Martin at January 13, 2008 02:27 PM (DRd0Y)

160

Entropy....thank you.

Skippy,

The irony of your criticizing of our complaining about your country's laws, and then subsequently slamming the Patriot Act, is dripping.

Whether or not Levant is an asshole is beside the point.  He's right.  Every human being has a moral obligation to oppose immoral law.  You may cite our country's lack of opposition to immoral law by bringing up the Patriot Act, or the war on drugs (obviously a favorite of yours...I personally support the legalization of marijuana for the record, though I don't smoke grass myself), but we have a far better record of rolling back immoral laws than your country apparently has.  In fact, we have amended our constitution several times for just that reason.  The 14th Amendment abolished slavery as an institution (and thus, the people, and not Lincoln, freed the slaves).  Prior to 1920, women could not vote.  The 19th Amendment fixed that.  The 18th Amendment had outlawed alcohol...the people openly and actively opposed it, and so the 21st Amendment repealed it.

These are instances of direct, active influence by the people, to change the constitution and laws of the nation, often in the face of open opposition by the government.

And that leaves aside one thing as well.  The right to free speech is not conferred by any government, neither yours nor mine.  It exists because we are human beings.  If I were an athiest, I'd say it belongs to every sentient being.  As I'm not, it comes from God.  But make no mistake.  It doesn't matter where the fuck you live.  If you live in Communist China, you have the right to free speech.  The fact you cannot exercise it is an abomination.  And if you live in Canada, you have it as well.  If you choose to let some low-level governmental bureaucrat cut out your tongue, then you're not a free man.  Ezra is a free man and he refuses to go quietly.  If more of you up there had the guts to say what he says, it would not be so.  Your vocal opposition to him is a tacit acceptance of one fact only:  you have abdicated your own right to free speech.  You might as well not have a blog or comment here.  In short, shut up unless you're going to support this guy.

Posted by: otcconan at January 13, 2008 03:07 PM (a6UdQ)

161 Another video  , you are entitled to your opinions  ........ hilarious .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 13, 2008 04:56 PM (Bivii)

162

Does anyone know when they intend to drag Steyn in front of The People's Court?

Posted by: Chop Suey Palace (R) at January 13, 2008 05:51 PM (mJpMx)

163 Ezra best exercised his individual freedom when he stated he did not recognize the commission's authority over him. A-men. It is the right of us all as human beings to accept or reject an individual or organization's presumed authority. A truly brilliant series of defenses, regardless of what Canada's law states. Strength of conviction and appropriate defiance on display here.

Posted by: art at January 13, 2008 05:55 PM (q/BUE)

164 Dead thread comment: Yeah, I know Rosa Parks technically went looking for trouble. But merely saying she went "looking for trouble" is nonetheless a mischaracterization of what she was trying to accomplish. By this definition anyone who takes a principled stand against tyranny is "looking for trouble," i.e. from the tyrant. The trouble comes from the tyrant, though, not from the individual seeking to be free.

Posted by: caspera at January 13, 2008 11:25 PM (kuj/I)

165 Skippy,

Most of the relevant topics have been covered in detail here concerning constitutionality (or lack thereof) of free speech restrictions in the U.S. and Canada.  I believe most parties involved could have done so in a more civil manner, but hey, this is the internets.

Though I feel I have something to add in regards to citizens from one country commenting on the laws and practices of another country's system.  It annoys me as an American to have everyone else in the world telling us we suck, we're stupid, and we would be much better off accepting their brand of socialism or totalitarianism.  However, they have the right to do so, just as I have the right to rail about any government I wish.  The citizens of that country can go ahead and be annoyed.

As an American, given our Supreme Court's growing trend of using foreign and international case law in their decisions on constitutionality of internal matters, I feel particularly strongly about having this right to criticize your government and people for their support of, or lack of resistance to, the creeping Sovietism in your country.  If it stands in your country, one day a panel of judges in mine may decide it stands here as well and I may lose that right for fear of 'offending' some dick thousands of miles away in Eastbufuistan.

Posted by: Ranba Ral at January 14, 2008 12:00 AM (fpk1J)

166 Luther vs. Eck, round 2.

Posted by: The Band at January 14, 2008 11:06 AM (/94xL)

167

Ranba Ral...

While your last point is a good one, I believe it is only one Supreme Court justice who has cited international law in a case, and was rightly ridiculed for it.  But I do not know, and it would take quite a study to find out, how many lower court rulings were based on it.

So...while your last point is good, it's not as bad as you portray, I think...but it could be.  Nice way for me to agree without disagreeing, do you not agree? 

...WTF am I saying?  I agree with your whole post.

Posted by: otcconan at January 14, 2008 04:04 PM (a6UdQ)

168 I'm a conservative in Canada and unfortunately for this cause, none of us really want anything to do with Ezra.  He's viewed here in his homeland by fellow conservatives as a self-promotional lunatic.  He did what he did originally for publicity, and admitted as much.  Now he's paying the piper.  Live/die by the sword.

Posted by: Mark at January 14, 2008 06:40 PM (742bj)

Posted by: shaop at February 14, 2008 03:00 AM (GO8r7)

170 ddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

Posted by: wow power leveling at March 26, 2008 04:19 AM (2CIuY)

171 World of Warcraft power leveling wow power leveling,wow power levelingisan online role-playing experience set in the award-winninguniverse.wow gold,wow power leveling Players assume the roles of wow power leveling heroes as they explore, wow gold,wow gold,WoW Goldadventure,and quest across a vast world. is a "Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game" WoW Gold,wow gold,wow power leveling.wow power levelingwhich allows thousands of players to interact within the same world.World Of Warcraft Power Leveling Whether adventuring together or fighting against each other in epic battlesplayers will form friendships, wow power leveling,wow power leveling,wow power leveling,wow power levelingwow powerlevelingforge alliances,and compete with enemies for power leveling and glory.wow gold,wow gold,wow gold,wow gold,wow gold,wow gold,wow gold,buy wow gold As a wow power leveling online game, enables thousands ofworld of warcraft power leveling players to come together online and battle against theand each other. Cheap WoW Gold,Cheap WoW Gold,cheap wow gold,cheap wow gold,World Of Warcraft gold,Players from across the globe can leave the real world behind and undertake grand quests and heroic exploits in a land of fantastic adventure. world of warcraft gold,world of warcraft gold,world of warcraft gold,Unlike other cheap opponents. Below are some features found in wow powerleveling

Posted by: mvypjs at May 06, 2008 01:50 AM (0iFgt)

Posted by: tagafa at May 14, 2008 12:16 AM (1gNqf)

173 The dear moderators:hello! Publishes comments one, if has the disturbance, asks respectfully forgiveness, thanks!

成都仓储笼 重庆仓储笼 武汉仓储笼 长沙仓储笼 合肥仓储笼 青岛仓储笼 深圳仓储笼 厦门仓储笼 福州仓储笼 济南仓储笼 沈阳仓储笼 长春仓储笼 苏州仓储笼 昆山仓储笼 无锡仓储笼 泰州仓储笼 扬州仓储笼 徐州仓储笼 连云港仓储笼 宁波仓储笼 温州仓储笼 义乌仓储笼 湖州仓储笼 天津仓储笼 大连仓储笼 东莞仓储笼 江苏仓储笼 浙江仓储笼 安徽仓储笼 成都托盘 重庆托盘 武汉托盘 合肥托盘 长沙托盘 青岛托盘 深圳托盘 厦门托盘 济南托盘 福州托盘 沈阳托盘 长春托盘 苏州托盘 昆山托盘 无锡托盘 泰州托盘 扬州托盘 徐州托盘 连云港托盘 宁波托盘 温州托盘 义乌托盘 湖州托盘 天津托盘 大连托盘 东莞托盘 江苏托盘 浙江托盘 安徽托盘 成都货架 重庆货架 武汉货架 长沙货架 合肥货架 青岛货架 深圳货架 厦门货架 福州货架 济南货架 沈阳货架 长春货架 苏州货架 昆山货架 无锡货架 泰州货架 扬州货架 徐州货架 连云港货架 宁波货架 温州货架 义乌货架 湖州货架 天津货架 大连货架 东莞货架 江苏货架 浙江货架 安徽货架 成都托盘 重庆托盘 武汉托盘 长沙托盘 合肥托盘 青岛托盘 深圳托盘 厦门托盘 福州托盘 济南托盘 沈阳托盘 长春托盘 苏州托盘 昆山托盘 无锡托盘 泰州托盘 扬州托盘 徐州托盘 连云港托盘 宁波托盘 温州托盘 义乌托盘 湖州托盘 天津托盘 大连托盘 东莞托盘 江苏托盘 浙江托盘 安徽托盘 成都仓储笼 重庆仓储笼 武汉仓储笼 长沙仓储笼 合肥仓储笼 青岛仓储笼 深圳仓储笼 厦门仓储笼 福州仓储笼 济南仓储笼 沈阳仓储笼 长春仓储笼 苏州仓储笼 昆山仓储笼 泰州仓储笼 扬州仓储笼 徐州仓储笼 连云港仓储笼 宁波仓储笼 温州仓储笼 义乌仓储笼 湖州仓储笼 天津仓储笼 大连仓储笼 东莞仓储笼 江苏仓储笼 浙江仓储笼 安徽仓储笼 东莞仓储笼 江苏仓储笼 浙江仓储笼 安徽仓储笼 成都货架 重庆货架 武汉货架 长沙货架 合肥货架 青岛货架 深圳货架 厦门货架 福州货架 济南货架 沈阳货架 长春货架 苏州货架 昆山货架 无锡货架 泰州货架 杨州货架 徐州货架 连云港货架 宁波货架 温州货架 义乌货架 湖州货架 天津货架 天津货架| 大连货架 东莞货架 江苏货架 浙江货架 安徽货架 成都托盘 重庆托盘 武汉托盘 长沙托盘 合肥托盘 青岛托盘 深圳托盘 厦门托盘 福州托盘 济南托盘 沈阳托盘 长春托盘 苏州托盘 昆山托盘 无锡托盘 泰州托盘 扬州托盘 徐州托盘 连云港托盘 宁波托盘 温州托盘 义乌托盘 湖州托盘 天津托盘 大连托盘 东莞托盘 江苏托盘 浙江托盘 成都仓储笼 重庆仓储笼 武汉仓储笼 绵阳仓储笼 长沙仓储笼 合肥仓储笼 青岛仓储笼 深圳仓储笼 厦门仓储笼 湖州仓储笼 济南仓储笼 沈阳仓储笼 长春仓储笼 苏州仓储笼 昆山仓储笼 无锡仓储笼 泰州仓储笼 扬州仓储笼 徐州仓储笼 连云港仓储笼 宁波仓储笼 温州仓储笼 义乌仓储笼 湖州仓储笼 天津仓储笼 大连仓储笼 东莞仓储笼 东莞仓储笼 东莞仓储笼 江苏仓储笼 浙江仓储笼 安徽仓储笼

Posted by: peterwei at May 24, 2008 10:39 AM (AdKTN)

174

結婚式 演出 太陽光発電 介護 転職  会社設立データ復旧   釣具 ウィークリーマンション  株式投資 害虫駆除  看護師  キャッシング テレマーケティング治験 バイアグラ 看護師   横浜中華街 結婚指輪  ウェディング  メル友 ウィークリーマンション 不動産 ショッピング枠 現金化 RAID復旧 データ復元  データ復旧 手掌多汗症 手 汗   メタボ対策  データ復旧  不動産担保ローン 海外推广  国际推广   网络营销   网络推广 バイアグラ  横浜 賃貸  データ復旧   RMT 価格   賃貸 カラコン 

 ダイビング  葬儀 東京 ECサイト構築 自動車ガラス 別れさせ屋    法律事務所 求人 ウェディングドレス   東京都 墓地

 基礎化粧品  有料老人ホーム  副業 清掃アダルトグッズパテックフィリップ  マンションリフォーム 住宅リフォーム   マッスルトレーナー  カラーコーディネーター     アメリカ ビザ マンスリーマンション 東京   アンチエイジング 化粧品 永代供養 特許事務所 会社設立 永代供養 納骨堂 ウォーキングシューズ  ウォーキング  サウナスーツ イメージコンサルタント  美容学校  ペット 求人 永代供養 広告業界  就職ナビローン  オペレーティングリース脱腸 お見合い

Posted by: koko at July 16, 2008 05:15 AM (LzCmC)

Posted by: dsf at August 11, 2008 03:36 AM (EcMKr)

Posted by: Farm Sex Online at November 14, 2008 06:50 PM (hfVEf)

Posted by: Granny Porn Online at November 17, 2008 02:20 PM (DTJXy)

Posted by: High Risk Personal Loans at November 22, 2008 07:50 AM (ItsGS)

Posted by: Christian Debt Consolidation Online at December 01, 2008 10:32 AM (kSRCt)

Posted by: Free Home Sex Movie at December 03, 2008 04:35 PM (LMOyO)

Posted by: Kim Kardashian Sex Tape Online at December 10, 2008 04:43 AM (/kM5t)

Posted by: Cheap Cigarettes at December 12, 2008 11:42 AM (du5yo)

Posted by: Kim Kardashian Sex Tape at December 26, 2008 02:13 PM (AXJHe)

Posted by: Granny Sex Online at December 30, 2008 11:21 AM (EV6Jd)

185 Welcome to wow gold our wow Gold and wow power leveling store. We wow gold are specilized, wow power leveling professional and reliable wow power leveling website for wow power leveling selling and wow gold service. By the world of warcraft gold same token,we offer wow power leveling the best WoW service wow power leveling for our long-term and wow powerleveling loyal customers. wow powerleveling You will find wow powerleveling the benefits and value powerlevelingwe created powerleveling different from other sites. As to most people, power leveling they are unwilling to power leveling spend most of wow power leveling the time wow gold grinding money Rolex for mounts or rolex replica repair when replica rolex they can purchase Watches Rolex what they Rolex Watches are badly need. The Watch Rolex only way is to look Rolex Watch for the best place RS Gold to buy Cheap WARHAMMER ONLINE GOLD. Yes! You find it here! Our WoW Gold supplying service has already accumulated a high reputation and credibility. We have plenty of Gold suppliers, which will guarantee our delivery instant. Actually, we have been getting RuneScape Gold tons of postive feedbacks from our loyal RuneScape Money customers who really appreciate our service.

Posted by: wow power leveling at January 16, 2009 03:07 AM (jlcze)

Posted by: ²È½Ð¾¯½÷ at January 30, 2009 11:32 AM (hXNNS)

Posted by: 家 mtcmtmail= at April 09, 2009 03:59 AM (ENq6P)

188 Hey. The function of science fiction is not always to predict the future but sometimes to prevent it. Help me! Help to find sites on the: Kingman paintball guns. I found only this - 32 degrees rebal Paintball guns. We at pw paintball started our business in march of. Southern california only full service pro paintball shop! You need tournament level guns, entry level guns, paintball loaders. Thank you very much :-(. Duscha from Germany.

Posted by: Duscha at July 16, 2009 07:01 AM (kZgnP)

Posted by: Wedding Dresses at August 20, 2009 10:58 PM (syU91)

Posted by: linksfromlondon at October 01, 2009 11:39 PM (SgUdh)

Posted by: retailike at October 17, 2009 01:24 PM (zFgZJ)

Posted by: NBA SHOES at October 24, 2009 08:41 PM (/6617)

Posted by: NIKE AIR MAX at October 27, 2009 04:27 PM (sS5lD)

Posted by: ugg boots at October 30, 2009 09:05 AM (3iF2y)

Posted by: discount ugg boots at November 01, 2009 01:33 AM (MlIdd)

Posted by: shoesshoe at November 03, 2009 10:42 PM (LHCCE)

197 Hi! HgozdBhL

Posted by: kebmqcd at November 12, 2009 08:48 PM (L37bi)

Posted by: ugg boots at November 14, 2009 06:02 AM (s7MB5)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 11:08 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 18, 2009 06:17 AM (C/zDM)

201 UGG BOOTS

Posted by: UGG BOOTS at November 21, 2009 05:37 PM (eVWSP)

202 The proper function of man is to live, but not to exist.ugg classic cardyConquer fear of death and you are put into possession of your life. ugg classic tallThere is a time to speak and a time to be silent. ugg knightsbridgefree shippingmbt cheap
mbt sale
mbt uk
mbt shoes cheap
buy mbt shoes
shoes mbt sale

Posted by: mbtshoesbuy at November 25, 2009 01:06 AM (fd1jz)

Posted by: replica watches at December 04, 2009 09:46 AM (bsW/x)

204 The womens mbtchallenges the hard to reach
muscles in your legs, but also works the abdominal, back, buttock, and thigh muscles.
With every stride, the instability activates the whole body in concert and tones as it
stimulates different areas.mbt
footwear
have a curved pivot sole that copies walking on soft moss. The sole of
href=http://www.mbtshoesbuy.com/products_new.html>new mbt
turns even, flat ground
into uneven terrain. The mbt anti shoes challenges the muscles to work harder with
every step you take. The unique curved sole works by providing instability and makes
the muscles of your body more engaged and also helps burn more calories.
The mbt shoes walking shoes have been
highlighted for its ability to cushion your feet while challenging your muscles.
Clinical studies suggest that regular use improves balance, posture and circulation.
mbt lami shoes re-establish
the natural conditions for standing and walking.You will get more results out of your
workouts ? MBT shoes have technology in the sole design that make your working more
efficient and burn more calories. With every step, the instability activates your
muscles and the whole body is stimulated as your walk more and more.Free Shipping
1Week on Select Styles Of discount
mbt
Walking Shoes Reviews !

Posted by: mbtshoesbuy at December 09, 2009 03:35 PM (B0M1x)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 16, 2009 05:42 AM (1dySH)

Posted by: replica watches at December 19, 2009 08:41 AM (wd3Wb)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 20, 2009 10:58 AM (1dySH)

Posted by: cheap Air Max at December 25, 2009 11:01 AM (ZgK+c)

209 Support by UK shopping links of London earrings was intuitive and nowadays we have matured internationally with stores in 1990.links of londonThe party resulted from a clean exact for her wife, links londonJohn Ayton, founded the jewelry mark,links of london sale Links of London. Relations of London were founded in the UK, Hong Kong, links of london charms USA and Canada.links of london charms Links of London is one of the chief jewelry brands in the United Kingdom.links of london sweetie bracelet It lays a lot of weight on producing jewelry featuring newer, exceptional designs.It has been reported that silver tiffany & co was regularly melted to oxidization are general accessories. links of london braceletJewelry designs however did not been fixed;

Posted by: links of london at January 01, 2010 10:07 PM (UTjDs)

Posted by: replica watches at January 05, 2010 09:48 AM (ndMAX)

Posted by: nike air max at January 20, 2010 03:49 PM (CZv6h)

Posted by: wedding gowns at January 25, 2010 06:10 AM (bBg/v)

Posted by: air max shoes at January 28, 2010 04:23 AM (JOSIc)

Posted by: HsvsRsvsesv at February 08, 2010 12:47 AM (JAKY6)

215 ainxq replica watches utaohh replica watches,qrmuyp louis vuitton unq replica watches,fxecn replica rolex gteusb replica watches,apwzpo watches replica flzu replica watches replica watches,turvisj louis vuitton bfmshh replica watches,xoyzy replica watches louis vuitton,bzbt louis vuitton,vueyno watches fstwwj louis vuitton replica qcsh watches kykbgn,louis vuitton,zxlplhe louis vuitton phmcrl louis vuitton,vtwrfmk replica louis vuitton pqjiwp,louis vuitton,ldfbh louis vuitton capp replica watches tmzejk.

Posted by: replica watches at February 09, 2010 02:10 PM (UTLu5)






Processing 0.18, elapsed 0.1909 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0151 seconds, 224 records returned.
Page size 272 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat