Justice committee  I believe in equality before the law. The problem with these kinds of cases is that if you have a professional department of human rights enforcers, they go after the easy targets. There's an imam in Montreal who has said far worse things than Mr. Keegstra, but because that is mu

Justice committee  Yes, and I believe a complaint to the Quebec Human Rights Commission was rejected, whereas some nothing twerp like Keegstra is easy to go after. Equality before the law means it makes no difference. If you run a red light and you run over Keegstra or you run over Nelson Mandela

Justice committee  I agree with Ezra in that I prefer a social disapproval, activist parents, or a school board firing to a law restricting what individuals can say and think. I would certainly support the school board firing him. I would certainly support the parent-teacher association refusing to

Justice committee  But you got the answer.

Justice committee  I'd like to add what I think the biggest difference is, and that is that the truth is no defence. You can make a statement, every aspect of which is factually accurate, and if certain people decide they're going to be offended by it the factual accuracy is irrelevant. In the tri

Justice committee  That analysis sounds as if it ought to be right, that there are some things so terrible that you can't let them sit out there. But the problem with it is that the Weimar Republic--Germany for the 12 years before the Nazi Party came to power--had its own version of section 13 and

Justice committee  I think he found himself in the same position as everybody who looks at this dispassionately. Professor Moon is certainly no fan or friend of either of us, but he found that, as a fair-minded man, when you look at section 13 in the cold light of day it's completely indefensible.

Justice committee  No, both of us have a principled objection to section 13 and are principled defenders of freedom of speech, so I have a philosophical objection to section 13. I have always had a philosophical objection to section 13, even at the time of the Supreme Court Taylor decision. However

Justice committee  Yes. I share the same concerns as Ezra. I happened to be reviewing a routine e-mail in the middle of the night, and I couldn't believe that the so-called Human Rights Tribunal had approved the so-called Human Rights Commission's wish to hold a trial in secret at which the accused

Justice committee  No, not at all. As I indicated, section 13 is appallingly written. The key word in there is “likely”, “likely to expose” someone to hatred or contempt. That is not a legal concept as it's currently understood by the human rights enforcers. They have a big list of what they call j

Justice committee  I would just add to that last point that Justice Dickson, in that decision, had a very narrow definition of section 13. There is nothing in there to indicate that he thought Maclean's magazine, the oldest and best selling magazine in Canada, would come under section 13 for choos

Justice committee  I want to second what Ezra Levant has said. Something has gone badly wrong in the Canadian state's conception of human rights. Until last month section 13 had a 100% conviction rate. Even Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong-il understood that you don't want to make the racket look too ob