VIDEO: Ezra Levant vs. Alberta Human Rights Commissioner Shirlene McGovern

Update: new video clips will be added here as soon as they are available. One more was added on Saturday night, and two more Sunday morning, bringing the total to six. **ONE MORE, MONDAY MORNING** **CLOSING ARGUMENT ADDED MONDAY NIGHT** **ADDITIONAL CLIP ADDED FRIDAY, TOTAL NOW AT NINE**

As promised yesterday, Ezra Levant (against the wishes of the bureaucrats) has posted to YouTube video of his hearing before the Alberta Human Rights Commission on Friday, January 11, 2008. The commissioner, Shirlene McGovern, clearly believes that what she is doing is right and just, and simply can’t understand why Ezra is protesting so. As Levant says in his own blog entry, this is Hannah Arendt’s “banality of evil” in a nutshell.

All of these clips are well worth a watch, for a rare (if not completely unique) look inside a Human Rights Commission hearing. For those who understand that freedoms of speech, expression, and the press cannot be compromised in a free, democratic society, Levant’s eloquence and passion will inspire you.

First, it’s Ezra’s opening statement. Note Ms. McGovern’s constant eye-rolling:

Next, it’s Ezra’s blistering response to McGovern’s question, “What was your intent in publishing the cartoons.”

Then, see Ezra destroy McGovern’s contention that Muslims are exposed to hatred and violence in a Post-9/11 world:

Next, it’s indignant Ezra at his best. Just wait for this line: “She’s a thug, you’re a thug, your whole company’s a thug.”:

Here, Ezra accepts appropriate limits to free speech (fraud, defamation, incitement to murder, etc.), but explains that there is no appropriate limit to political speech. “Unlimited political speech is the antidote to political violence.” And near the end, he utters this quote of impassioned brilliance: “I’ll rot in hell before I use my mouth to say that fascist’s words with you as an instrument to compel me to do so.” Then, he lays down his line in the sand: “Canada’s Human Rights Commissions have, if you can believe it,  issued lifetime bans on people uttering comments. I simply won’t comply.”

And this nugget shows McGovern giving him a dismissive “you’re entitled to your opinions”, with Ezra replying with a rhetorical flourish:

This next clip exhibits the absolute arbitrariness of the standards used by the Alberta Human Rights Commission when determining if a complaint has merit. Ms. McGovern says the standard of whether something is discriminatory or not is very high; when Ezra cites the low bar used by the AHRC in a decision written recently by McGovern’s colleague, Lori Andreachuk, she simply says, “well, that was her decision; when it goes to panel, anything can happen.”

And here is Ezra’s closing statement, in which he BEGS for his case to go to the full tribunal, BEGS to be heard in front of the “most fascistic” commissioner, and BEGS to be convicted, so he can take his case to the real courts:

One more – here’s Ezra demonstrating his theory that Soharwardy’s complaint stems more from his frustration at having his “clock cleaned” in a CBC Radio debate the morning of the cartoons publication, than it did from any offense taken about said cartoons themselves:

Amazing work, Ezra!

Advertisements

23 Comments

Filed under Against the Grain, Free Speech For Me Not For Thee, Islamic Propaganda in Canada, Islamist-Leftist Alliance, Statism Gone Wild

23 responses to “VIDEO: Ezra Levant vs. Alberta Human Rights Commissioner Shirlene McGovern

  1. Pingback: Ezra Levant’s Free Speech Crusade: Hearing at Alberta Human Rights Commission « Flaggman’s Canada

  2. Gunny Smith

    Don’t ever let these videos be destroyed. Don’t comply. Never compromise your comments. Let that old bag roll her squinty eyes up so far they stick their sockets. Childish-childish-just like the whole intent behind the commission. Childish lawsuits and childish task force members. Can’t handle the playground muhammed? Twit. You think we will ignore the history of your “religion” sir if we are so bullied? Ha. How freaking ironic it is to scream so loud and beat down your critics with the star chamber instead of with common dialog. If you are not tough enough in Canada to withstand the taunts of the school children, then you’ll never be an adult. Roll your eyes again m’dear, but in my family it would earn you a hard slap. Little children ought not drive the judiciary any more than drive a car frankly. Roll your eyes again m’dear. Nobody ought do this child any favors. Anybody who needs a useful idiot need go no farther than this Orwellian commission. Who speaks for all those persons outraged and conveniently destroyed by the Muslims? Certainly not the children running Canada. Where are the adults? Let’s see, which one was rolling their eyes in response to the other? Is this the type of mentality that ought to be allowed, or should the child be put in their place instead?

    Take care…..

  3. reformislam

    Canada: Freedom of Speech succumbing to Kangaroo Courts of the Human Rights Commission

    Proceedings against Ezra Levant are nothing short of ridiculous, but let’s consider the implications for moderate Muslims. This “investigation” will further divide Muslims and non-Muslims in Canada. It will give credence to radicals’ claims that the West is at war with Islam. It will antagonize non-Muslims and radicalize moderate Muslims. Regardless of the outcome, once again Islamists skillfully manipulated Dhimmi justice system and came out as clear winners. Thank you, Human Right Commission.

  4. Shirlene McGovern is not a “Commissioner.” No AHR Commissioners are involved. Is it asking too much that you get your facts straight?

    McGovern is an investigator, whose mandate it is to determine if the complaint should go forward. I hope it doesn’t. I don’t think it meets the legal test.

  5. Dr. Dawg, you seem to know a lot about the fine distinctions here between “Commissioner” and “Investigator”. Please share the nuance here. The bottom line is, she is a state inquisitor enforcing political speech crimes – crimes which are completely incompatible with a free society. Whether she is a “Commissioner” or an “Investigator” makes not a whit of difference. Her job should not exist in a civilized society.

  6. personalrep1

    VERY IMPORTANT STATISTICS CONCERNING KORAN

    By
    Larry Houle
    http://www.godofreason.com
    intermedusa@yahoo.com

    Muthuswamy cites research on the Koran, conducted by the Center for Political Islam, which illustrates the Islamic focus on conformist behavior and beliefs. According to the Center’s analysis of the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith, only 17% of the Islamic trilogy deals with the words of Allah. The remaining 83% refers to the words and deeds of Mohammed. Of all of the references to “hell” in the trilogy, 6% are for moral failings, while 94% are for the transgression of disagreeing with Mohammed. Statistical analysis of the trilogy revealed that 97% of references to “jihad” relate to war and a mere 3% to the concept of “inner struggle.”

    About 67% of the Koran of Mecca deals with punishing unbelievers for merely disagreeing with Mohammed. Over 50% of the Koran of Medina deals with hypocrites and jihad against unbelievers. Nearly 75% of the Sira deals with jihad. About 20% of the Hadith by Bukhari is about jihad. The majority of the doctrine is political and it is all violent.

    In 4% of the cases, women were superior, in 91% of the cases they were inferior and in 5% they were equal. But there is a big catch. The only way that women are equal is after death on Judgment day, when men and women will be judged on how well they followed the Koran and the Sunna. And guess what? The only way to follow the Koran and the Sunna is to obey men. Equality means obeying men

    Woman are superior by being a mother, who must obey her husband. So the perfect woman on Judgment day will be a mother, who obeyed all the men in her life. So really, the women are subordinate to men in 100% of all of the Koran, Hadith and the Sira.

  7. You asked for clarification. Here it is.

    Commissioners preside over a quasi-judicial process, akin to a civil trial.

    Investigators determine, in effect, if a trial should take place.

    That’s no fine distinction. People are calling McGovern a villain here (or even more picturesque things); but in fact, she’s an essential element of due process, and is likely, I suspect, to stop this complaint in its tracks. You understand checks and balances, right?

  8. Thanks for clearing that up. But it’s a distinction without a difference. She’s a proud part of a completely disreputable organization and process, sitting there as a representative of the government while interrogating a private individual on his “intentions”.

    Here’s how I would characterize your poor little Ms. McGovern: in the words of comrade Vladimir Ilyich Lenin himself, she’s a useful idiot of the West.

  9. By the same token, then, the players in a preliminary hearing of a person unjustly accused of a crime are violating his rights.

    McGovern is likely to stop the complaint dead. Rather than spewing venom at a person doing her job, why not see her for what she is–a likely ally who will find no merit in the complaint.

    No one should have to go to a formal civil proceeding without having passed through a filter that strains out unfounded complaints. And here you’re blaming the filter. Great logic, there.

  10. alexb

    Dr. Dawg
    The CHR tribunal has a 100% conviction rate under their thought crime provision (section 13 “hate messages”)
    Judging from what i seen and heard from this “investigater” there is not much chance she will stop the case from continuing on to Tribunal.
    Nuff said.

  11. emil

    Dr Dawg, the Inquisition had “filters” too. And “due process”. Same goes for communist tribunals. Lots of filters and due process. Actually, this is what Canada has become. A country of filters and due process. Common sense and the deep appreciation of liberty have been thoroughly cleansed. A hollowed out country where people like you look up to filters and praise the ethics of due process.

  12. David

    Dr Dawg, If Ezra Levant is not found guilty, it will be because of the video recording that his inquisitor will want to distance herself from. Had someone else, say yourself, been in Levant’s place without the video and without blog distribution of the video clips, you would likely be ruled guilty. Inquisitions or investigations as you prefer, outside the rule of law and in comparitive secret are likely to produce [and have] 100% conviction. Even if that was not true, the process is offensive. I’m sure you must be able to understand that, given it is a liberal principle. Perhaps it is objectionable from your point of view for liberal principles, to be utilized by a Conservative. I’m also guessing this will be the last time Ms McGovern allows a video camera into her interrogations. Smackdown on McGovern; smackdown on you, Dr Dawg.

  13. Smackdown, my eye. You’re already setting up a little abili for yourself. If Levant’s complaint goes forward, it’s Kristallnacht (as one over-wrought commentator elsewhere described a simple screening process)! If his complaint is stopped in its tracks, it’s only his heroism what dunnit!

    Where do people get the “100% conviction rate,” by the way? http://www.albertahumanrights.ab.ca/legislation/panel_decis_2007.asp

    Sorry to bring facts into this, but it’s just the way I am.

  14. Did I say “abili?”

    Early in the day for me. “Alibi,” of course.

  15. How did the camera come to be there? Is it always there? For what purpose?

  16. Levant brought it himself and insisted upon taping the entire session. He’s getting maximum mileage out of this.

  17. …looking at the video’s, who’s the real thug here?

  18. If only more than 68 people would hear about this!

  19. of the many video clips that i download, i always watch those that are very funny ~:,

  20. I like this web site and have absolutely book marked it. I‘ll look to study in additional information on my trip

  21. Pingback: Uncommon Descent | Materialist atheism stays in charge – how do doubters survive?

  22. Ezra doesn’t truly give a damn about morality. He is just as much as a phony as David Suzuki and the Alberta Human Right Commission. Someone please shed some light on this topic. Ezra talks a lot about ethical oil and how Canada can provide the world with ethical oil in contrast to OPEC oil. If Ezra really wants to be an ethical activist, why does he not stand up to the American economics of power with a solution to the problem with the American economic power crisis. OPEC oil is sold in American dollars which creates an artificial high American dollar. It is the very foundation why the US can continue to exist without falling apart. This is why OPEC exists and it is why America has a stake in the Middle East, it is why the US went to war in Iraq and Libya (Saddam tried to sell oil for euros which lead to war, Gadhafi tried to sell in Libyan dollars. Look what happened to them), it is why there is a negative sentiment in the Middle East against the western world which also creates the wealth in the Middle East to fund terrorism. If Ezra had a set he would be talking about this instead of wasting his time drawing silly cartoons when he knows damn well that the Human Rights Commission is going to raise a stink. If Ezra can’t understand the crux of the ethical oil dilemma then how is he to understand morality?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s