Saturday, December 22, 2007

The enforcers   [Mark Steyn]

Re my chastisers at the Canadian Islamic Congress and their enablers at Canada's "Human Rights" Commissions, the great George Jonas weighs in:

They wouldn't have complained to the Human Rights Commission about Mark Steyn writing in Maclean's that many Muslims are "hot for jihad," say Nasseem Mithoowani and three fellow complainants, had Maclean's agreed to publish a rejoinder "from a mutually acceptable source."

No, this wasn't an offer to invest in the magazine or to buy ad space, but an exercise in free press, Islamic-style. "If Maclean's wants to publish articles alleging that many Muslims are 'hot for jihad,' " explain Mithoowani & Co., "it has to provide an opportunity to respond."

Has to? Well, actually no, not in this hemisphere. At least, not yet.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

As Stanley noted, Ali Eteraz's comments section is one of the best places to go for some of the debate on this. Mr Eteraz regards me as an alarmist xenophobe racist buffoon but he's my new best friend because he takes the quaint view that my writing should not be ruled, de jure, a criminal act. This comment by Tarek Fatah provides an interesting glimpse of what happens to moderate Muslims (such as the Muslim Canadian Congress) who dissent from the hard line:

What Daniel Simard does not disclose is the fact that her partners in this high-school adventure threatened the Muslim Canadian Congress with legal acation if it did not withdraw its support of Macleans magazine’s right to publish Steyn. 

Incidentally, the plaintive tone of the plaintiffs - "All We Want Is A Chance To Respond" - rang a little hollow to yours truly. When they came in to Maclean's for their meeting, they demanded money from the magazine for their "cause". Meanwhile, their anonymous cheerleaders at this Canadian law blog suggest more than a financial shakedown may be required:

Steyn’s freedom is hardly at stake.

Yet.

Oooooooooh.

12/22 08:19 AMShare