A few more reviews

Exactly what does that illustration mean? In Shakedown I write about money -- the money that victims of human rights commissions have to fork out in legal fees and in fines. I even write about my own money, and the fact that I had to shell out $100,000 to fend off an HRC fatwa. But that's about it with the money.

So why am I depicted as, well, as someone who eats money?

It makes no sense to me, but if I were a hate crime complainer-of-fortune, I know what I'd say: I'd say it's a depiction of me as a money-hungry Jew. I mean, who eats money, other than people who are money-hungry? And you don't get much Jewier than someone named Ezra Isaac Levant. All that's missing is a bagel.

Oh, don't worry. I'm not going politically correct on you. I'm just laughing at the authoritarian Left. Not the liberal left -- for there is nothing liberal about Susan Cole. She believes in censoring those she disagrees with, by calling the government. She even thinks the government should arbitrate what jokes are funny. Cole doesn't see people as individuals; she sees them the same way she sees herself: as part of a particular identity group, and all your rights and privileges flow from that. It's the very definition of prejudice. Anyways, I love how even Now's readers tear her to ribbons in the dozens of comments that follow.

Let me quote my favourite line from Cole's review:

He could have shared those cartoons in a less inflammatory way. So what if they caricature Muhammad in no worse ways than Jesus is sent up in art and commentary? Write about them.

Can this really be the opinion of Now's entertainment editor -- someone who writes for a magazine, and whose beat is art, movies and plays? Is it really her artistic view that a magazine ought not to show a cartoon that is the center of a story -- especially a news magazine telling a news story? Is she for real? If so, why doesn't she run her own magazine that way -- not showing pictures of things.

This line is just gorgeous:

He couldn’t imagine mitigating hurt feelings by banding together with moderate Muslim groups.

As a matter of fact, we had plenty of Muslim moderate writing for our magazine, both pro and con the cartoons. And not just on the cartoons -- we had more permanent Muslim staff at the Western Standard than Cole has at Now magazine. But not because we were trying to "mitigate hurt feelings". That's not the purpose of a news magazine -- our purpose was to publish the news and interesting opinion.

But my favourite line is the last one:

Ezra Levant got exactly what he deserved.

Oh, really? A 900-day investigation by the government? Is that what Susan Cole thinks people deserve for the crime of disagreeing with her politically? A three-year punishment by the state?

I'm not upset that she didn't like the book -- of course she wouldn't, she believes in censorship. I'm upset that the best she could do by way of rebuttal was this sloppy effort.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised: censors really aren't used to debating, are they?

P.S. I suppose it could have been worse: instead of eating dollars, Cole could have drawn me eating shekels.

Women's Post review

Here's another review of Shakedown, this one from Toronto's popular Women's Post. I had the pleasure of meeting with their publisher, Sarah Thomson, and I'm afraid that Susan Cole wouldn't like her much, either -- Thomson isn't angry enough, lesbian enough, or fascist enough for Cole's taste. Plus there's something Jewy about Thomson -- I'm not fooled by that last name.

Here's the Women's Post review, written by Jacoline Loewen. Some excerpts:

I truly feared for Canada's future as an entrepreneurially-minded nation when I read Shakedown...

Organizations like Human Rights Watch, which fight against human rights abuses internationally, must be aghast at the hijacking of the words “human rights” by the HRC which, as Ezra Levant points out in his book, are making a mockery of those very words.

Levant opens by describing his own situation: as the owner of a business (he is the former publisher of the Western Standard) accused of human rights abuses (re-printing those Danish cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad in negative light) but, to his credit, quickly puts that aside and tackles a full blown investigation of the HRC cases — a kind of audit...

Using his legal background, Levant unpacks case after case, illustrating the imbalance between the person making the human rights complaint and the business owner. The complainant gets a lawyer (funded by tax payers), does not need to face the business owner they are accusing, may get a cash payment, and may even get a written apology even published in the paper.

...If the complainant’s case is dismissed, they are not required to cover the costs to the business owner as a real court case dismissal would require. It gets worse: The HRC can enter your work and home to seize any property they want without a warrant — good Lord, is this Zimbabwe?   

It's an interesting review, from the point of view of a business owner -- the target market for the Women's Post.

Xtra magazine

Another group on Susan Cole's hate list would be the gay magazine, Xtra. Cole is lesbian herself, but out of step with Egale, the national gay rights lobby, and Xtra, the leading gay newspaper, which are solidly for freedom of speech. Unlike Cole, they haven't forgotten that it was short years ago that gay-themed books were seized by customs police on the pretext of obscenity. Cole somehow thinks that censorship can be brought back in for those she disagrees with, but that her own dissident proclivities will remain untrammeled by the thought police. Nice try. Here's Marcus McCann's review in Xtra; some excerpts:

Gays have spent nearly a half-century fighting censorship in Canada. We fought for the freedom to read novels, watch films and subscribe to the newspapers that reflect us, no matter who said they were objectionable.

...In other words, we know what a government muzzle feels like. It chafes.

... Levant is best known as the publisher of the now-defunct Western Standard, the Alberta-based Conservative magazine that reprinted the infamous Danish Mohammad cartoons in 2006.

...The rest of the book is his argument for the reform or abolition of Canada's human rights regime. Along the way, he shows that gays have been excellent defenders of free speech.

...Sadly, Egale's tack has changed under its current executive director, Helen Kennedy, and now the lobby group is in the business of lobbying the government to refuse visas to anti-gay reggae stars like Elephant Man. Alas.

...Levant inscribed my copy of Shakedown with the following words: "To Marcus, someone who knows that we must fight for the expressive freedom of dissidents."

The reviewer still thinks there is a place for HRCs, but that place shouldn't include censorship. In other words, Xtra magazine and Egale are, so far, more freedom oriented than the Conservative governments of Alberta or Canada.

Canadian Jewish News

I like the streak of independence that the Canadian Jewish News has been showing in the past six months when it comes to human rights commissions. Here is a story that they ran last November, ending the Jewish community's silence about the anti-Semitic publications made by Richard Warman, a former investigator at the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Four months later, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal itself denounced Warman for his online bigotry, calling it a disgrace. You can read their blunt ruling here. (Two months after Warman was called onto the carpet for his hate speech, the Canadian Jewish Congress has not yet distanced themselves from his odious tactics, nor have they rescinded his "human rights award".)

The CJN's Paul Lungen has another solid report on the subject, pegged to my book. Some excerpts:

It’s safe to say Ezra Levant doesn’t have a large fan base inside Jewish organizations that, under various community relations mandates, are expected to defend Jews from the dangers posed by anti-Semites.

Levant has stepped on more than a few toes with his caustic critique of Jewish groups that, he says, support human rights commissions’ restrictions on free speech in order to tackle what he considers to be a non-existent threat posed by neo-Nazi nobodies posting material on the Internet.

...Indeed, in Shakedown, Levant offers a compelling case why the hate speech provisions in human rights legislation should be abolished, if not the commissions themselves. The commissions have become superfluous in pursuing their original mandates of ending discrimination in the provision of apartments and jobs. Employment and landlord and tenant legislation already does that, he says.

What we have now is a bureaucracy staffed by left-wing activists expanding the reach of the state to limit legitimate expressions of free speech to satisfy  groups or individuals who feel aggrieved. That’s not a bargain most Canadians feel comfortable with, Levant argues.

...Dragged before the Alberta Human Rights Commission, Levant made it “my personal mission” to repeal the provision limiting free speech.

...And in that area, Jewish organizations are out of step with their constituencies. “I don’t think Jews are for censorship,”he said. “As a minority, we were subject to censorship.”

Levant dismisses the argument that anti-Semitic words could lead to genocide. “The presence of anti-Semitic words did not lead to the Holocaust,” he said. “It was laws passed by the Nazis that led to genocide.” You are mistaken if you believe that a government that would kill you would be deterred by the rulings of human rights commissions, he added.

The night before his interview with The CJN, Levant was on a panel in London that attracted 600 people to hear a discussion on free speech and the commissions. His book is number 3 on the Globe and Mail’s best-seller list. Editorials across the country have come out against the commissions’ restrictions on free speech, as did an investigation by Prof. Richard Moon for the federal commission. Alberta is taking another look at them.

“There are very positive signs.I think change is going to come,” Levant said. 

I think that more and more Canadian Jews are waking up to the fact that the Official Jews -- i.e. the CJC -- have been on the wrong track when it comes to censorship. And, even those who might not be offended by censorship on a philosophical level can at least see the pragmatic problems posed by radical Muslim groups using those same laws against Jews like me, or Zionists like Mark Steyn. I am delighted that, if anything, my vigorous criticism of the CJC has led to more Jewish speaking engagements. I think that the Jewish community is shifting; grassroots organizations like a Jewish newspaper would know that; undemocratic "official" organizations like the CJC -- really the personal left-wing hobby horse of Bernie "Burny" Farber" -- will be the last to change.