When Warren Kinsella lied and intentionally left blog readers with the impression that I personally defended David Ahenakew's re-instatement in the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (among others) it re-inforced my impression that Warren Kinsella is nothing more than a lying jackal.
So I guess it comes as no surprise that Warren would hold in high regard, another lying jackal, Khurrum Awan, as evidenced by his strong character defense of him and his sock puppet compatriots on his blog a little more than a month ago.
I mean, I've known that Khurrum Awan was a liar from the moment I challenged him personally, and questioned him from behind a microphone at a "town hall" meeting that the sock puppet three, and the Ryerson University Students Union put on in early January.
He and his sidekick, Muneeza Sheik strongly proclaimed that nothing they were doing was, or had anything to do with censorship. They only wanted "to be heard", they affirmed.
Before the panelists and the audience, I read aloud Section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, only to be told by Khurrum that I "don't know what I'm talking about."
I thought to myself: how can this scumbag look at me with a straight face and tell me he had no desire to censor Maclean's and Mark Steyn, whilst knowing that upon successful prosecution of his complaint, that the result would be exactly that?
He did so without flinching.
A scumbag, I thought. Not anymore than some other lawyers who've struck me as scumbags. But a scumbag nonetheless.
He didn't care to address my concerns about the implications of censorship, because it wasn't his intent to censor. He just wanted "fairness".
The problem is that looking into his eyes, I knew that he understood clearly that what he wanted was exactly that: censorship. Simply because, his concept of "fairness" in the media requires censorship; the displacement of wordspace for one viewpoint, for the printing of another. The invariable implication of which can be arrived at simply by considering that a publishers free right to publish as they wish will be infringed upon through the application of a bureaucratic "fairness doctrine" which Awan wants the Human Rights Commission to install in order to oversee the media and expunge all the purported islamaphobia for which he decries. Censorship called "fairness". Sounds like lawyerly scumbaggery to me.
Today's hearing of the British Columbia Human Rights Commission reaffirms my scumbag label.
He now says that he never was asking for a "mutually acceptable author" to publish the response in Macleans. He says, that the attribution of this position to him is a lie. Of course, it's not a lie. And anybody who watched his bald head grace their TV or computer screens on TVO's The Agenda, knows it's a lie. In fact, he called Mark Steyn the liar for pushing the very story —which today—he now claims was his story all along.
No, you lying scumbag—As Ezra points out—you don't get off that easy.
In TV interviews, all he wants is a "mutually agreed upon" response, and under oath and threat of perjuring himself, he claims the opposite. He now claims that it was always his position that Maclean's should accept whatever author the Canadian Islamic Congress sent them.
That certainly changes the whole story doesn't it, Khurrum? You willfully told a lie, repeatedly, to a plethora of TV cameras and reporters, in order to cast Maclean's management in the worst possible light.
It's important for every reader of this to realize, that Awan has essentially corroborated Maclean's side of the story, and taken a giant proverbial shit on the story he's been telling over and over again to Canadians through the media.
He's even admitted, under oath, that he was seeking a shakedown of cash from Macleans in the order of $10,000. Which is, once again, completely contrary to the story and bullshit he's been selling.
When assholes like Awan are the ones calling for limits on free speech, it reaffirms just how important free speech is. It protects us from the fascism that his likes would unleash on society, given power of the state to enforce his viewpoint to the peril of all others.
Awan lied to my face, in a room filled with people. He belittled my "simplistic" view of free speech. He commands no respect with me. In fact, he can kiss my ass.
Quit beating around the bush and tell us how you really feel Mike and don't for gawds sake don't hold anything back.
What a pack of lying jackals we have in Canuckistan.
Are you sure you would want to sully your posterior that way, Mike?
All I can say Mike - You Da Man!!!!!!!!!
Cheers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mike:
I spent a good chunk of my childhood in ex-pat communities throughout the Middle East.
You don't want Khurrum Awan or any other male Islamist nutbar anywhere NEAR your ass. Trust me on this one.
I know Ezra Levant talks a lot about how he is the victim defendant in several defemation suits. Are you aware though that he is also the Plaintiff in a suit in Calgary where he is suing a man for doing the unheard of crime of writing a letter to the Editor.
Sueing this man for $100,000 I guess so he can get back the money he alleges he spent fighting Syed Sowhardy.
So next time Ezra whines well give him some cheese or simply look at the statement of claim he has filed in defamation court for $100,000.
"When assholes like Awan are the ones calling for limits on free speech, it reaffirms just how important free speech is. It protects us from the fascism that his likes would unleash on society, given power of the state to enforce his viewpoint to the peril of all others."
hmmm thats interesting indeed. As long as its not Awan then its ok eh?