Words
It's about time.
I and a few others met with these young folks, a few weeks ago, and advised them to stop trusting Maclean’s. Some of the editors there are Janus-faced* ideologues, who excel at torque and tilt. These young people, meanwhile, were genuinely offended by what the magazine’s country club bigot, Mark Steyn, had written about them. They simply wanted an opportunity to respond - not, as Maclean's has falsely claimed, control of the whole magazine.
(Case in point - I have personal experience with their bullshit: back in February, I objected to something Steyn wrote, too. After much prodding, an editor at the magazine asked me for a 300-word letter to the editor. I immediately provided one, with sources. The letter they solicited was never published - and, many weeks later, I still have to receive the courtesy of a reply. Like I say, they're dishonest.)
Having met with the Osgoode students and talked to them, I know that they were not interested in punishing or prosecuting anyone – they merely want what anyone would want, when their fundamental beliefs are being defamed: a right of reply. Some equal time. That’s it.
What I suspect they will be proposing to Maclean’s – now, openly and in full public view – is what they were always proposing: that they would be happy to drop their complaint if Maclean’s would give them a reasonable amount of space to counter some of the unfair and inaccurate things Steyn, a notorious Islamophobe, has written about their faith.
My impression of these young people? They are citizens. They are young and idealistic. They are law-abiding people. They should be able to live free from defamation of their deeply-held beliefs, just like anybody else. And all that they were after, really, was what anybody else would be after in similar circumstances – a chance to say this was wrong, this was unfair, and why.
That's not at all: I also came away convinced that they did not want to bring a human rights complaint – they were forced into doing so by Maclean’s obstinacy and its unwillingness to give them some equal time.
Ken Whyte et al. claim to be Canada’s national news magazine. They should prove it, by giving a bit of space to reflect the views of the hundreds of thousands of Canadians they ridiculed and denigrated.
…
PRESS CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
In the Name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful
The Canadian Islamic Congress Media Communiqué
Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - Rabi-al-Thani 23, 1429, Year:11 Vol:11 Issue:44
April 29, 2008
ISLAMIC CONGRESS AND LAW STUDENTS TO MAKE
PUBLIC SETTLEMENT OFFER TO MACLEAN'S ON HUMAN RIGHTS COMPLAINTS
TORONTO - The Canadian Islamic Congress and a group of law students who recently filed human rights complaints against Maclean's magazine for publishing Islamophobic content, are planning to present a public offer to the magazine's management to settle the matter.
Details of this offer and more information regarding the background of the above-mentioned complaints will be provided to those in attendance.
When: 10:00 a.m.: Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Where: Fairmont Royal York Hotel, The Quebec Room, 100 Front Street West, Toronto ON
Present at the media conference will be:
- Faisal Joseph: CIC legal counsel, former Federal and Provincial
Crown Attorney, and former Chair of the Criminal Section of the Canadian Bar Association (Nova Scotia).
- Muneeza Sheikh, Naseem Mithoowani and Khurrum Awan: Three of the law students/graduates who were original complainants against Maclean's magazine.
For more information contact:
Faisal Joseph: (519) 672-4510
*UPDATE: Wells polishes his employer's apple, again. In a funny way. Come to think of it, he should be editor. (Libertarians are great at coma-inducing essays about tax cuts and the evil of Islam, but not so great at running businesses, turns out. And, as CARD data shows, paid subs at Maclean's plummeted after Whyte took over in 2005. Libertarians: all they do is lose media market share.)
I and a few others met with these young folks, a few weeks ago, and advised them to stop trusting Maclean’s. Some of the editors there are Janus-faced* ideologues, who excel at torque and tilt. These young people, meanwhile, were genuinely offended by what the magazine’s country club bigot, Mark Steyn, had written about them. They simply wanted an opportunity to respond - not, as Maclean's has falsely claimed, control of the whole magazine.
(Case in point - I have personal experience with their bullshit: back in February, I objected to something Steyn wrote, too. After much prodding, an editor at the magazine asked me for a 300-word letter to the editor. I immediately provided one, with sources. The letter they solicited was never published - and, many weeks later, I still have to receive the courtesy of a reply. Like I say, they're dishonest.)
Having met with the Osgoode students and talked to them, I know that they were not interested in punishing or prosecuting anyone – they merely want what anyone would want, when their fundamental beliefs are being defamed: a right of reply. Some equal time. That’s it.
What I suspect they will be proposing to Maclean’s – now, openly and in full public view – is what they were always proposing: that they would be happy to drop their complaint if Maclean’s would give them a reasonable amount of space to counter some of the unfair and inaccurate things Steyn, a notorious Islamophobe, has written about their faith.
My impression of these young people? They are citizens. They are young and idealistic. They are law-abiding people. They should be able to live free from defamation of their deeply-held beliefs, just like anybody else. And all that they were after, really, was what anybody else would be after in similar circumstances – a chance to say this was wrong, this was unfair, and why.
That's not at all: I also came away convinced that they did not want to bring a human rights complaint – they were forced into doing so by Maclean’s obstinacy and its unwillingness to give them some equal time.
Ken Whyte et al. claim to be Canada’s national news magazine. They should prove it, by giving a bit of space to reflect the views of the hundreds of thousands of Canadians they ridiculed and denigrated.
In the Name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful
The Canadian Islamic Congress Media Communiqué
Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - Rabi-al-Thani 23, 1429, Year:11 Vol:11 Issue:44
April 29, 2008
PUBLIC SETTLEMENT OFFER TO MACLEAN'S ON HUMAN RIGHTS COMPLAINTS
TORONTO - The Canadian Islamic Congress and a group of law students who recently filed human rights complaints against Maclean's magazine for publishing Islamophobic content, are planning to present a public offer to the magazine's management to settle the matter.
Details of this offer and more information regarding the background of the above-mentioned complaints will be provided to those in attendance.
When: 10:00 a.m.: Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Where: Fairmont Royal York Hotel, The Quebec Room, 100 Front Street West, Toronto ON
Present at the media conference will be:
- Faisal Joseph: CIC legal counsel, former Federal and Provincial
Crown Attorney, and former Chair of the Criminal Section of the Canadian Bar Association (Nova Scotia).
- Muneeza Sheikh, Naseem Mithoowani and Khurrum Awan: Three of the law students/graduates who were original complainants against Maclean's magazine.
For more information contact:
Faisal Joseph: (519) 672-4510
*UPDATE: Wells polishes his employer's apple, again. In a funny way. Come to think of it, he should be editor. (Libertarians are great at coma-inducing essays about tax cuts and the evil of Islam, but not so great at running businesses, turns out. And, as CARD data shows, paid subs at Maclean's plummeted after Whyte took over in 2005. Libertarians: all they do is lose media market share.)