Anna said “Second free clue: even if everything you say about Steyn were true, attempting to silence him for his views is completely antithetical to Canadian values, as enshrined in your own constitution. At bottom, YOU wish to censor Steyn. YOU wish to deny him his rights!”
Obviously, Anna, you have difficulty reading English. How do the words “trumped up claims”, “little chance of succeeding”, “As is their right. As they should have that right. And we should certainly be outraged if the tribunals find against them.” and then conclude I support censorship?
Bizarre.
I don’t take issue with the laudable assertion and defence of rights. I take issue with Paul’s making these nefarious anti-rights people out to be some sort of heroes.
Especially when MARK STEYN IS NOT EVEN ON TRIAL HERE. That’s a semantic difference, I agree, with respect to the very important right to free speech; but it is an important fact as these non-friends of individual rights flail around calling themselves martyrs and heroes.
