Posted on 06/05/2008 11:18:48 AM PDT by marinamuffy
We’re back, and the first item for business is Joseph demanding an apology for yesterday’s “scaredy-pants” outburst, which he says is causing his client “stress.”
It seems he is going to call Habib, but first wants to introduce yet another piece of last-minute evidence, from yet another blog post — this one from the California-based “Free Republic” site — which is yet again operated from somewhere in that vast section of the universe that is outside the jurisdiction of the tribunal. McConchie is raising objections, probably futilely.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.macleans.ca ...
Canada ping.
Free Speech dull thud...
Aussies, Canucks, Brits and their cultural surrender... And, judging from the Moslem yoots car-burning reactions, France may actually be resisting their immigrant insurgents a bit. The Anglos, tho? Bet an Islamic Napolean could invade today’s Britain with little opposition.
Steyn ping
While surfing FR to find intemperate speech, will the HRC surf muslim sites for comparison?
Its not hard to find intemperate speech at FR, though they do place some limits. Go too far and you’ll get bounced.
And it would not be hard to find muslim sites where they are sawing off people’s heads. Not sure what you’d have to do on one of those sites to get kicked off.
I highly doubt it....it would probably be considered a hate crime!
jihadunspun.org
So I don’t get it. I heard Mark Steyn just talking with Hugh Hewitt about how Free Republic was part of this mix, but I don’t understand how. If people say things that are construed as anti-arab terrorist then it’s on Mark Steyn?
Canada Free Speech Ping.
That is odd...
I hope the court records include a link to the offending thread.
I’m pretty sure you mean jihadunspun.net. The .org domain is occupied by a cybersquatter.
Supposedly one of my posts was cited. I merely said that the Muslims will get us one way or the other. I meant we can have our heads still on our bodies and surrender, or they will take our heads. If my post was so offensive, it would have been removed. Frankly, we need to fight back on US soil as well as abroad, or else we get this BS.
Frankly, I do not care if the Canadians like the truth or not. Too damn bad.
By the way, when you do visit jihadunspun.net, scroll way down to the articles:
==>
Rights And Rules
What would America’s founding fathers think about President Bush’s assertion that he has inherent power, his wrongful in invasion of Iraq and the eroding rights of US citizens?
By Former US Vice President Al Gore
I was reading the Macleans blog a short while and saw this. One was someone’s tagline. Pretty tacky and not helpful to Macleans or Steyn.
Although this whole case is ridiculous anyway. They are bringing in stuff that is actually completely irrelevant to the case itself. I never heard of Mark Steyn until I’d been studying Islam for a couple of years. I didn’t need him to tell me what to think. All I needed to do was read the Qur’an, ahadiths, and look at what historians had to say about Muhammad. It took only a few days of this for me to reach the same conclusions about Islam and my opinion has gone downhill from there. Canadian Muslims don’t need to force Macleans to publish them “to be fair.” There are thousands of Muslims bloggers.
Apparently. And Macleans is responsible for everyone in the entire world's response to what Mark Steyn writes. So by this logic shouldn't Jodie Foster have been brought up on charges for a certain assassination attempt?
The defense should get some samples of what was posted before Steyn wrote a word, LOL.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.