Barbara Amiel's article

"Why are teachers trashing Western values?" is the title of it. And it references America Alone.

This is what Awan is talking about now.

Amiel's article wasn't the subject of the complaint, nor was the book America Alone itself.

But why should such legal arcana stop this tribunal? If it can hear some Toronto law clerk give his personal reflections in some weird, government-sponsored act of psychotherapy, why not let the man go on a long, stream of consciousness ramble?

Now he's kvetching that Amiel mentioned that Muslims sacked the Great Library of Alexandria, Egypt.

None of which is legally relevant. But, just for the sake of political argument -- as this is a political trial -- what exactly is Awan saying? That Muslims burning a library engenders hatred for Muslims? Or is it hateful that Amiel writes about that historical fact?