~ DON’T FORGET our proposed Steynian Actionables. ‘Tis the season to be pesky! UPDATE— You’re all forbidden by CHRC rules to contact Dr. Mohamed Elmasry, CIC Chair & National President. A tipster warns:
“It is a criminal offence for anyone to threaten, intimidate or discriminate against a person who complains, gives evidence or helps with a complaint. The Canadian Human Rights Act provides for fines of up to $50,000 for threatening, intimidating or discriminating against an individual who has filed a complaint, or for hampering an investigation. The Commission can also investigate and deal with complaints of retaliation against persons who file a complaint.”
We sincerely wish that was a joke. Nothing wrong with emailing the CHRC themselves though. Canada: “Welcome to Our Police State. Assume the position. Papers, please.” …. (We Ourselves)
~ FUN WITH LEGAL JIHAD — ‘The ‘Muslim Libel Cases’: Nothing Less Than ‘Legal Jihad‘. Do you suppose there are people preparing or trying for some ‘legal jihad’ in Canada? Oh dear: a plague of lawyers …. (freedomszone)
~ A GOOGLE on LawCool Omar, for your information. We’re not sure if this is also him: “Omar began his clinical career in Nuclear Medicine Technology, developing an interest in radiological hazards before completing a degree in Health Services Management. He has operated in various aspects of healthcare with an emphasis on disaster and emergency management.” (our emPHASis). We stand to be corrected …. (google.ca, naymz)
~ BUSTED! A Steynian Commenter: “I also see that you have the MSM programming trick which allows you to delete comments without it being known to the commentor. Nice try, Future Show-Trial Lawyers of Canada.” Tsk, tsk, Omar & friends! Themselfs (sic) who delete or prevent blog-comments might appear to oppose free speech or differing views. Gosh, people may get the incorrect impression that no particular theoretically Islamic-friendly lawyers could possibly be gearing up for legal jihad within the Canadian legal system, to promote Sharia, and ‘encourage’ people to join the Jihad-team– and then with troublemakers like Theo Van Gogh and ever-on-the-run Salman Rushdie as a warning, people will learn to keep their heads down and their mouths shut, type thing. Theoretically speaking. Whatever that outlook is, it’s not Canadian, or civilized, and just it won’t do …. (Various)
~ GEORGE JONAS— “In the West, “free” means that if Maclean’s wants to publish articles alleging anything, it publishes them. If it then wishes to publish other articles alleging the opposite, it does that, too. C’est tout. End of story. That’s what press freedom means in both official languages. If it loses something in translation into Arabic, Urdu, Persian or Human Rightese, too bad. For the time being, English and French govern” …. (nationalpost)
~ SHAIDLE: “More on those Law Is Cool “nellies”: they rewrite comments on their blog”; revisit: First thing we do, we give all the lawyers spell check …. (5footsoffurry)
~ UPPITY INFIDEL Maclean’s editor responds to CIC allegations …. (macleans.ca)
~ IS DEAN STEACY, Hyumin Rites Inquisitor & Heroic Hate-Repressor, visiting this site right now? (Dean Steacy is an INTERNET investigator for the Canadian Human Rights Commission) …. (google, wnd)
~ THE “RIGHT” TO RESPOND— “The Muslim law students who’ve launched human-rights complaints against Maclean’s tell their side of the story in today’s National Post. Basically, they say their human rights are being violated because Maclean’s – which printed several pages of letters in response to Mark Steyn’s controversial article – won’t publish their response” …. (damianpenny)
~ THE CHRC should not attempt to control Internet content …. (efc.ca)
~ MAGIC STATS: Steyn critics prove they don’t understand freedom of speech; Older post: “I support Mark Steyn, Maclean’s, and free speech” …. (magicstatistics)
~ THE WAR ON Religious Freedom in Canada Continues …. (newsbusters)
~ OOooOOooOO! — “We’ve had over two thousand new visitors in the past 24 hours. We can track how people get to our site, so we know they are mostly readers of Mark Steyn or affiliated sites.” Gasp! The Law Is Kool-Ade people are watching YOU.. yeah, YOU! Maybe they’re “making a list, and checking it twice, gonna find out who’s naughty or nice”? Oh, wait: our blog-software does that, too.. so do site-meters. By the 
way, O gormless ones: unless you’re eating or referring to a specific edible pork-byproduct, then SPAM™ refers to unwanted mass e-mail solicitation (or fake usually machine-generated blog-comments.. for herbal mortgages, free vacations, 7-figure Nigerian inheritances, nekkid stuff type thing). Lots and lots of visitors sent via other websites to your website leaving comments? — well, generally that’s considered by most web-persons to be a desirable thing, and goes by highly technical interweeb® terms such as “Traffic” or “Visits” or “Hits“. Go ahead and check out the internet, and you’ll get those troublesome terms sorted out …. (Poseurs)
~ A COUPLE OF CHRC TRIBUNAL CASES online, for your education and enlightenment: via the Star Chamber Inquisition Kangaroo Court Canadian Human Rights Tribunal InterWeb Site …. (Various)
~ HMMMMM? — Is Abolishing Canada’s Human Rights Commissions Necessary? …. (canadafreepress)
~ DAMIAN PENNY— Live by the Human Rights Commission, die by the Human Rights Commission …. (dp)
~ INDEED— “Mr. Soharwardy has to realize he is in a free country now” …. (jihadwatch)
~ THE PROBLEMS WITH the Canadian Human Rights Commission – Human Rights Tribunal Panel. A 1998 Report …. (oag-bvg.gc.ca)
~ AMERICAN THINKER: “Mark Steyn needs your help” …. (americanthinker)
~ THE ETHICS of ‘Law Is Cool And So Are We”– Steyn & a blocked commenter– “Given that the law students of Law Is Cool support a “human rights” system that prosecutes you for blog comments, it is worth noting that its anonymous editors rewrite blog comments. Over at Ali Eteraz’s site, David Reese points out: “They’re falsifying reader comments over at Simard’s blog, http://www.lawiscool.com./” Here, http://lawiscool.com/2007/12/22/steyn-fans-spam-law-is-cool/#comments, I wrote, “A question: given the remarks made by many in Canada’s Muslim communities toward homosexuals, when can we expect your complaints to the HRC regarding same?” My comment was edited to read, “A question: given the remarks made by many in Canada’s Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Sikh and Hindu communities toward homosexuals, when can we expect your complaints to the HRC regarding same?” Despicable.” Simard, whoever is administering the comments section on your blog is a liar. Is it you?” And Law Is Cool” not so cool …. (steynonline)
~ HAVING TROUBLE figuring all this out? These free online videos will help. You’ll need to download their free DivX player …. (stage6.com)
A Swift Sunrise 
You can delete this comment.
I’m not a huge fan of Steyn’s work, but I do support his right to express his opinion.
I wanted to let you know that linking to non-public officials who may be involved in this process could make things worse. Even if you do not live in Canada, at best it will increase the sympathy of the Tribunal to the complainants. It doesn’t matter if you’re not officially affiliated with Steyn, because they can use it as an example of harrassing behaviour that his articles and books are encouraging.
Stick to the content, not the personas. The Canadian legal system is a little more tricky.
Doesn’t making fun of the tribunals in this way only make Mark Steyn look worse?
In Amsterdam we have to deal with these issues all the time. We’ve found that blogs are a bad idea – they are usually admissible in court – and a number of people have been prosecuted as a result. Even when it’s not their blog, because it can be used as ancillary evidence.
Actually, we had a case with the CHRC (quite different tho), and they actually got annoyed by our support base flooding them with emails.
A few comments here and there seemed fine, but when we had a deluge of form emails they got kinda pissed.
Is it an “offence” for Elmasry to be contacted by someone not resident in, or a citizen of, Canada? If so, how would they extradite me from Ireland? If they came looking for me, they would have a big problem: all we leprachauns look the same – and we’re all called Paddy or Seamus!
Saith Binks– Dear Seamus O’Paddy: I have no idea. Perhaps you would be tried in absentia, and forbidden to come to the People’s Socialist Republic of Canuckistan, on pain of fines and imprisonment. Our justice system is obviously somewhat mad.
“The Muslim law students who’ve launched human-rights complaints…”
I don’t know, but at least one of them looks non-Muslim by their names. Probably even Jewish.
Seems a little silly to make it a Muslim only thing. And kind of makes you out as a big bully.
Saith Binks– Rachel: That’s how Damian Penny put it on HIS website (hence the quote-marks). Feel free to warn him on this matter. As to whether he is a big bully or not, I have no idea.
Thanks to “Lawyer” for your comments – also enjoyed yours, Binks!
I will not communicate directly with Elmasry. I will instead contact the Chief Leprachaun at the Irish Sub-Human Rights Association.
Seriously, I will indeed attempt here in Ireland to initiate debate on this. I have real admiration for Mark Steyn. Also, he is well known here through the media – but they don’t appear to have as yet picked up on this current situation. I will revert with any progress.
Saith Binks– Well done, then, Ted!
Eamonn, they don’t have to extradite you to file a libel suit, they can do that in your jurisdiction.
For example, Elmasry or any of the others listed on this site, can sue if the comments can be argued to impact their professional reputation. I guess that would include the students too (I don’t see their names on that site though, and if some cited are NOT involved their case is even stronger).
Legal issues are always a tricky matter. “Rallying the troops” must be done with tact. It’s different than politics, for example.
It’s the reason why so many of us are Libertarians I guess, though some vestiges of law is needed to prevent anarchy.
From what I’ve read above, it might be better just to link to organizational sites (i.e. CIC), and remove names listed.
Thank you, LibEgalFrat! I appreciate your comments. Actually, mine were made tongue in cheek – I forgot momentarily that you guys in North America don’t “do” irony!
On the legal front, I don’t know the position in Canada, but here in Ireland if a person takes a libel action the onus is on him to prove that the “offending” article is untrue. The author does NOT have to prove that it is true. Thus, a potential litigant has to be very wary before making a move, because, if the article is true – albeit castigating the subject – then all that is achieved is further publicity for the article. Not only that, but one then has the prospect of even more devastating truths being opened in court, with the total privilege inherent therein. In such a scenario, a bad boy can end up a very bad boy indeed!
May I wish you all a Very Happy CHRISTmas (if that “offends” any readers – tough!): Nollaig Shona Dhibh Go Leir!
Saith Binks: A Happy & a Merry to you, brave Irish commenter!
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa! Apologies, I must have had too many scoops of Guinness! My previous comment is wrong wrong wrong.
In fact, in Ireland when a person takes a libel action, THE AUTHOR OF THE ARTICLE HAS TO PROVE THAT IT IS TRUE. The onus of proof does NOT rest with the litigant, but with the defendant – the total opposite of the normal procedure in law. I was aware of this as I wrote my comment, but I somehow got it all confused. Just put it down to the drink (actually, I don’t touch alcohol – haven’t for years – as Billy Connolly said “I’ve had enough!”).
Sorry about all that ………I’ll just hide down this big hole in the ground that I see has conveniently opened up beside me ………….. I might re-surface next year.