Mohammden Legal Midget
After making a complete ass of himself fronting the Canadian Islamic Congress’s BCHRT run at Macleans and Mark Steyn, Khurrum Awan, might have been wise to lie low and pretend to be someone else. I mean making a complete fool of yourself across Canada and calling the entire HRC regulation of speech into question would satisfy most people’s craving for ridicule. But not our Awan.
The Mohammedan Legal Midget has decided the Muslims of Canada have not been embarrassed enough. They have not been scorned and laughed at sufficiently. So Awan has decided to issue a Libel Notice to Ezra Levant. Ezra takes Awan’s, somewhat illiterate and legally rather doubtful, Notice apart over at his blog.
But, seriously, Awan, has it ever occurred to you that these legal stunts simply make you, and by extension, Muslims, look thin-skinned, stupid, illiterate and whinny? Now, given that you have filed this Notice through the offices of Brian Shiller – Lucy and the Lying Jackal’s lawyer – one cannot help but think you may have been encouraged to file by the increasingly desperate defenders of s. 13. In other words, played for a patsy by people who have no interest at all in anything but shutting Ezra up.
If you want to be the utensil of these people you are, of course, perfectly free to file bogus lawsuits. But remember, utensils are discarded when they are no longer useful. As you reduce yourself to a laughingstock you will no longer be useful. And you’ll join “Serenity Now Vigna” in the legal scrapheap.
And you’ll look even more like a dink than you do now.
July 26th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Oh that’s gonna sting.
July 26th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Fly…meet windshield.
July 26th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
These types of lawsuits are counterproductive—even, and particularly, for those whose reputation may actually have been harmed—because they will only air even more of all that “dirty laundry” in public.
Usually, those “defamations” are not noticed by the general public, but they are once lawsuits start flying all over the place.
July 26th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Wouldn’t it be awesome if our courts came down much harder on those who file frivolous lawsuits?
In this case, for example, a lawsuit should be tossed as frivolous on account of the bad spelling in the statement/notice. If a legal paper like this isn’t worded and prepared professionally, it should be classified as frivolous automatically, and the instigator should be punished severely (at least several thousand dollars).
July 26th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
KS I know you read comments here. “Hair of the Dog” would be a much better choice for a theme song. I can understand why you picked the one you did though. It is winey and annoying.
July 27th, 2009 at 3:05 am
You just know Awan is a byproduct of affirmative action. He got to be the token mo for the law society of Canada. He is just chock full of “lawyring” skills.
He really has that self destructive suicide thing down pat. Maybe it is innate.
July 27th, 2009 at 4:56 am
Well Werner – it comes as no surprise that our “Best Bud” has chosen the same Lawyer as Lucy and Der Jackel.
Going through the 22 pages of the suit – I cannot believe a Lawyer would sign his name to it or even entertaining/engaging “A” as a client. I know Legal Aid is on strike, as is the Toronto Bus union but this????
July 27th, 2009 at 6:34 am
If your description of Awan is correct, Jay, then I guess we’re talking about legal midget wrestling. For all his bluster, from my review of record, it appears that the closest Ezra’s come to a successful resolution of a defamation action is his grovelling apology to Senator Ron Ghitter.
BTW, if you’re going to accuse someone of being “somewhat illiterate” (?) then you might be careful about your own spelling. Unless by accusing him of being “whinny”, you were suggesting he made a noise like a horse. Or is he, as WTF asserts, winey? And if so, how does WTF know Awan tastes like wine?
July 27th, 2009 at 9:52 am
tw, work with me here – blog post/libel notice. See the difference? In a trivial way you are right and while Awan is a horse’s ass so far as is known he does not actually whinny. I suspect, were I planing on filing my blog posts as legal documents, I might copy edit a bit harder. A task apparently beyond Awan and, more disturbingly, Barry Schiller upon whose letterhead the wretched piece of work appears.
July 27th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Well perhaps Shiller didn’t write it at all, doesn’t even know about it. Perhaps Arwhiney just borrowed a slice of his letter head and penned it himself. Didn’t he do that before, another time when he was pretending he had the authority of the law on his side?
Just another real good excuse for everyone in Canada to get a good laugh at the sockmo puppet.
July 28th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Jay,
Why would I work with you? You engage is childish name-calling instead of argument. You’ve repeatedly demonstated you know SFA about libel law. (Your proposals for reform of libel law amounted to Get Out of Jail card for people who really don’t care if what they say has any basis in truth.)
You can’t seem to understand that the reason Levant keeps getting sued is because he deliberately and with considerable calculation libels people. Why? Perhaps, because when he’s not over the top, not slinging mud nobody pays attention. Worse, nobody sends money.
July 28th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
tw, are you suggesting that Vigna has a case? Are you suggesting that the Mohammaden Legal Midget has a case? Go read. If you are still convinced then we have a very different standard as to libel. Which is fine; but the reality is that with the exception of the Lying Jackal’s headline grab claim, none of the weanies suing Ezra seems willing to go for more than 50K for fear of Discovery. And most are proffering settlement.
Defamation law is about choices; how much do we value free speech vs. how much we want to protect private reputation. If I post a video of rats charging through a fast food restaurant should I be worried about a SLAPP suit? If I have an opinion as to the ethics and position of a civil servant based upon facts accepted in evidence by a Tribunal, should I be liable?
The SCC seems to be taking s.2 seriously in considering these cases. A fact apparently lost on the losers suing Ezra and various other members of the blogosphere.
July 29th, 2009 at 6:15 am
Jay,
Do we have a different standard of libel? Probably. You apparently believe that a Muslim can’t maintain an action in defamation, even if someone accuses him of being a liar and engaging in a “shakedown”. In my view, both those statements are, on their face, defamatory and actionable. Does Ezra have a defence? Maybe, but it isn’t apparent from prolix nonsense he posts on his site.
You also apparently believe that a party bringing a suit is not entitled to do so in the most economical and legally advantageous manner. Or that if they do so, it automatically calls into question the validity of their claim. This is ridiculous. In Canada, libel damages tend to be modest, and teh costs of pursuing a libel claim can be considerable. In that context, it would border on negligence to commence a full action if the same result could be obtained by a simplified action.
You also seem to be of the view that offers of settlement are proof of vexatiousness. Given that 95% of civil actions don’t make it to court, if you are correct there is clearly a massive abuse of the legal system underway. Someone should set up a Royal Commission. (Are you sure you went to law school? Did you suffer a brain injury after you left?)
You seem to believe, based on your earlier posting, that the SCC is going to make some bold ruling on the defence of justification – allowing the defence “even if facts can’t be absolutely proven”. Perhaps you point me to the case from such a principle might emerge. And please don’t point me to the public interest responsible journalism defence being considered in Cusson v. Quan. The off-the-cuff accusations that Levant and his camp-folllowers fling about don’t even come close to meeting the standards of responsible journalism. They barely rise above schoolyard taunts.
July 29th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
I think Canada’s libel laws and actions are so out of control they rival the out of control ambulance chasing in the United States. No one has a spine or is deemd to need one apparently in Canada. And in this case we are being confronted by an act of legal jihad.