Mark Steyn on "Christmas with counsel.
"Here's my bottom line: I don't accept that free-born Canadian citizens need the permission of the Canadian state to read my columns. What's offensive is not the accusations of Dr Elmasry and his pals, but the willingness of Canada's pseudo-courts to take them seriously.
Right-o. Some fans started a Free Mark Steyn site. The editor of Human Events stands up for Steyn and others. Robert Spencer writes Stand by Steyn.
wherever offensive speech is prohibited, the tyrant’s power is solidified. That is no less so in this case, although the tyrant in question is of a different kind.Kathy Shaidle's been all over the Steyn case (scroll around). She or someone created that banner ad up top (that it doubles as an anti-Hillary ad is bonus). David Warren points out that if we won't have free speech, we will have much worse.
We, in the West, do not legislate for the Dar al-Islam (the Muslim realm). On the contrary, we endure the fallout from countries in which, because the right to free speech is not secure, opposition to authority must be expressed through violence.
I make this hard point because it is necessary to understand. “Freedom of expression” did not develop in the West from purely idealistic motives. Nor is it necessarily a pretty thing. Like so much in civil society, we put up with it because the alternative is worse, and we'd rather cope with free speech, than with the free intimidation that results from its suppression.
