Pearl Eliadis, a prominent human rights lawyer who recently attended an annual conference of human rights agencies, critiques a bottom-feeding blogger:
Ms. Eliadis singled out one in particular, blazingcatfur. blogspot.com, as "poisonous" for referring to her panel at the conference [on the media--DD] as a "Texas cage match."
She said it was evidence of the "appalling tone" that is "illustrative of how badly this debate has gone."
She had this to say as well, as reported in the National Post article:
At the same time, she said the three Muslim law students who complained against Maclean's magazine have done themselves a disservice by claiming they have a right not to be offended. "I'm sorry, you don't," she said. "Those sorts of things have to be part of the normal rough and tumble of debate and discourse."
But enter the hysterical Ezra Levant, who seems to believe that he and his merry band are the only ones entitled to that "rough and tumble" thing:
It's actually quite a revelation: Eliadis's own words show us that she's about political censorship, about squelching criticism, about muzzling her opponents. She's not even pretending that it's about real human rights. She doesn't want her world view to be criticized, and so she wants to criminalize dissident views.
All this for referring to BCF's views as "poisonous?" Ezra, as your friend, I'm advising you: get some rest. Please.