It means an ad hominem attack has a little more value from someone who posts under their real name.

Again, let's use your argument in the context of breast cancer. The essence of what that would look like is that a person has no place sympathizing with breast cancer because they've yet to experience it first-hand, else their opinion is null and void.

The fact of the matter is that personal experience (or even second hand experience, as we're arguing) is a useful rhetorical device that can bring relevant examples to the fore that exemplify an important principle in the debate, not to mention firmly 'planting your flag' on a certain point of view. The principle here is that freedom is both valuable and vulnerable, and thus is worth fighting for. In this case, Wayne exemplified the principle by citing members of his family that did so.

And to cite breast cacer or drunk driving without knowing me is extremely insensitive, aside from being irrelevant. Good day to you.

How's the squirrels and you enjoying the view?

Meanwhile: htlp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.B.Glennie_is_a_nut…

Meanwhile: ” target=”_blank”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.B.Glennie_is_a_com…

Here is a good article for you by a Jew.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2…

after you bone up on that, I'd suggest you peruse this -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projec…

I only raisd the "monster" reference in response to Ed, who questioned my degree of respect. If you read my original post toW ayne's, would you say I lacked respect? I, unlike Wayne, did not label a person/idea in order to denigrate it.

My response was not kneejerk as you suggest, it was not provoked by a party label – read my profile; don't project your own shortcomings onto others (he who smelt it dealt it) – and was certainly not disrespectful.

The man in the picture got described as"The bravest ever Canadian ever" in a puff piece in the Ottawa Citizen in 2007 but the halo appears to have become a bit tarnished in the Lustig ruling and even more in Warman v.Lemire by Hjais.

And even more so for the intervenors who witnessed the antics and tactics, stood by and did NOTHING. While they are demanding an APPEAL, no where have they apologized for allowing this travesty of justice to occur under their watch. That includes the AG!

But to the CHRC officers and managers – have any been disciplined, dismissed or otherwise counselled? Has an internal inquiry been convened to see what other "infractions" were commited – how many other racist posts were posted by employees and ex-employees? Me thinks not.

But thanks Macleans for having Steyn as a contributor. I renewed my subscription again. Perhaps next have Levant join the team?

The antics and tactics (witnessed by the Ag as well as various Special Interest Groups [CJC, BB, and FOSW]) were such that in my mind bordered on illegal and certainly immoral appear not to have been condemned by the "Intervenors" who roll merely along asking for an APPEAL. Go figure.

I would hope criminal charges would be part of their appeal.

Which, as you point out, makes him, you know, not-Jewish. Just as myself, even tho. my grandparents were born in Scotland, is not Scottish. My other ancestors were Irish Catholics. Does that make me of `Catholic descent'?

*Every time someone mentions "Jews", he is "a hater" and the likes of Warman could go after him using CHRC.*

Every time someone mentions Jews in a bigoted manner, yes, I will go after you. And, only in your fevered imagination did the CHRC `go after' anyone who mentioned `Jews'.

Your squirrels and those of Conway Twitchell above, will have plenty to discuss I know.

Isn't Joe Wilson your "buddy"?

Because CHRC is a government body, only the government can appeal this decision, not B'Nai Brith of CJC or some other Jewish organisation. It seems that only Jews object to this decision. However, I must say that Jews have enough financial and political power in Canada to force the government to institute an appeal. We will see.

He brought up the ancestry, not because he sees it as a reason to cull the CHRC, as it were, but simply because he's marking it as a reason for being happy about the outcome, not as a reason to bolster the decision itself.
"I'm glad that the CHRT came to its senses because it reminds me of the important freedoms my (insert ancesty here) fought for."
A Victoria cross in this context is totally non-sequitur to the discussion – as is the minority rights plug. Nobody doubts the useful role a tribunal CAN play here with respect to minority rights. It's clear that that's what it was meant to do, but failed quite miserably. What the argument turns on is the basic respect for a person's dignity and their individual freedoms. Ed's a reasonable guy and hit the nail on the head the first time.

And I didn't call anyone who disagres with me a "monster", as did Wayne.

Unlike your buddy Joe Wilson.

1. Introduce a 10% or even 20% consumer tax, such as GST, like Canada and some some European countrie do.
2. Introduce a large tax on gasoline, so that its price would be similar to what we pay in Canada of what people pay in Europe.
3. Raise substantially income taxes on everyone making more than $ 50,000 and escalating to 98% for those making millions, like they do in Scandinavian countries.
4. Abandon all the totally useless wars and all the military bases (some 200 of them) throughout the world.

In other words, stop being an Empire and become a normal country, like the other western countries.

Voila. And the American debt will decline and eventually may even be eliminated entirely.

As to CJC, "The Canadian Jewish Congress disagrees with the decision, and has called for an appeal."

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomm…

As to your last sentence, this is exactly the reason why Section 13 should be abolished. Every time someone mentions "Jews", he is "a hater" and the likes of Warman could go after him using CHRC.

Some facts: Steyn is not Jewish; Levant is, but have you actually checked out what he has to say about what he calls the `official Jews', the Canadian Jewish Congress?

But, I know, facts are nothing to you, sissyphase, Twitchell and the rest of the haters.

meanwhile, Twitty, we can't help but to laugh at your nonsequitors.

btw – aren't your squirrels getting hungry?

and sissyface, there's a teabagging awaiting there somewhere.