Was David B. Harris the Very First Canadian to Go Through Attempted Censorship by Muslims?

David B. Harris is the former Chief of Strategic Planning of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS). He is now the Director of International and Terrorist Intelligence at INSIGNIS Strategic Research Inc.

In April 2004, while on Ottawa's CFRB radio, he asked this question:

"Shouldn't someone be looking into CAIR-CAN's relationship with its more-troubling American relative, CAIR?"

CAIR-CAN's then Chair Dr. Sheema Khan sued both Mr. Harris and the Ottawa radio station for libel. Mr. Harris and CFRB radio didn't back down after these accusations. And in 2006, CAIR-CAN "dropped their suit, cold. No damages, no costs, no apology, no clarification."

This is very similar to what happened to Ezra Levant, except that rather than being sued for libel and brought before the court system, he was charged with "promoting hate" and brought before the Human Rights Commissions. Three years later, the complainant Syed Soharwardy also withdrew his case.

Perhaps in 2006, CAIR-CAN was not yet familiar with the intricacies of the HRCs, and went the legal libel route. In any case, both incidents show that Muslims are more than ready to silence anyone who speaks truthfully about the problems in their religion and its organizations. We have so far seen a court case and a HRC case come to nothing. (That doesn't mean though that the accused suffered lost time, lost money and endless months of frustration). But, I think that Muslims will continue to manipulate all the possibilities to silence discussion and debate, and most of all disagreement, when it comes to their religion.

Awan's Victory

Here are some of Canada's conservative pundits and bloggers commenting on the Ezra Levant lawsuit.

From Right Girl:

His Steynship is hosting a fundraiser all day today to deal with the pernicious problem of Khurrum Awan and his hilarious suit against Ezra, wherein Ezra calls the incompetent Awan, er, incompetent.

Kathy Shaidle writes:

Make no mistake: this is not personal. This is another case of SOFT JIHAD.

Beligerent Muslims are using our own societal structure and institutions (like the legal system) to silence their critics.

The soft jihad will not succeed -- but ONLY if we don't weary of the fight, and help each other out.

I KNOW, from personal experience, that this stuff gets depressing and exhausting after a while. So along with giving any money we can, we also need to contribute to keeping each other's morale up.

Jay Currie says:

While the Mohammedan Legal Midget’s threatened lawsuit is sure to provide months of entertainment it all costs money.

Kathy Shaidle is the only one who gets the serious implications of this; the others think it is a combination of entertainment and nuisance. But, Shaidle cedes to depression and exhaution, and group help to boost morale. That's all. This alone shows that Awan has won, unlike her later blog post which Shaidle simply titles: "Mark Steyn: 'We're winning.'"

Of course, she now has to start thinking about alternatives to this "depressing and exhausting" battle, and illuminating her fellow-bloggers on the steps to prevent further Awan-style disruptions from occuring.

One clear-cut and practical way is simply to reduce and reverse Muslim immigration. The fewer Awan's, the fewer lawsuits and other disruptive activity by Muslims that I've been blogging about since the inception of this blog. See the side column under "Action" for well-thought out proposals for these changes in Muslim immigration.

Ezra Levant's New Lawsuit - No Surprise There

I actually have a lot of respect for Levant's
fighting spirit. He just needs to figure out what
he is really fighting.

That didn't take very long!

Ezra Levant is being sued, in a real court, with real lawyers this time.

By whom, you ask?

By a Muslim!

Well, he is Khurrum Awan. He is part of the group that filed cases with the British Columbia Human Rights Commission, the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Commission against MacCleans and Mark Steyn for the excerpt they printed from Steyn's book America Alone.  

Now, Awan is suing Levant ("here's the pdf document) for the "defamatory statements that [Levant has] published on [his] blog located at the URL www.ezralevent.com."

And who will help with the fundraising for the "nuisance suit", as Levant puts it? None other than Mark Steyn. "Check in tonight  [Tuesday July 28] at midnight" writes Steyn. 

Steyn should have fond memories of Awan since he was in that famous TVO almost-non-debate with him (here is the five-part video of the TVO episode), until Steve Paikan's journalistic integrity shone through and brought Steyn over into the debating room with Awan and his two (female) stooges, who had initially refused to debate Steyn.

And one of the women made covert threats towards Mark Steyn asking him if he likes to be a martyr.

This is what I've been talking about. For Muslims, the HRCs were just a gimmick, a tool, to disrupt and disorient their opponents. Levant went through three strenuous years fighting off his HRC suit. Now, he has to sit through this charade in the guise of a "real" lawsuit.

I wonder what battle Levant will fight next, to prevent more "nuisance" suits against him, because I don’t doubt they will happen again? The HRC war is almost over, but the enemy still stands!