HRT live

no-image

Liveblogging the Maclean’s Trial V: Stand and Deliver

Merciful heavens, it’s the last day. Time for final arguments…

no-image

Liveblogging the Maclean’s Trial IV: Habib and Habib Not

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.”

no-image

Liveblogging the Maclean’s Trial III: Die Another Day

Day three dawns, and the crowds have thinned. Maybe a dozen spectators today, none of the protestors (pro-Steyn!) of the first day. Media is down to me and Brian Hutchinson of the National Post, whose fine piece on yesterday’s proceedings is definitely worth a read. Ian Mulgrew also offers a trenchant article in the Vancouver Sun. (UPDATE: My mistake. The Province is here, as was Terry Milewski of the CBC, at least to start. Also some smaller publications.)

no-image

Liveblogging the BC HRT, Day Two: A Day That Will Live in Entropy

Lots of good coverage of yesterday’s proceedings, beginning with the mighty Ezra Levant, who had so much fun he’s staying on another day. Also Brian Hutchinson, my old stable mate at the Post, pays appropriate homage to the majesty of it all. Plus the great man himself, of course, and uber-blogger Michelle Malkin and Jay Currie and … well, I better get in while there’s a chance of a seat…

no-image

Liveblogging the BC Human Rights Tribunal—Day I, Part II

Earlier: Liveblogging the BC Human Rights Tribunal—Day I, Part I

no-image

Liveblogging the BC Human Rights Tribunal—Part I

So we are in, and almost ready to go. As trials of the century/year/week go, this one is decidedly down-market: the courtroom would make a good walk-in closet. Maclean’s legal team is out in force, a phalanx of half a dozen suits. The opposing counsel, by contrast, is one suit and two or three badly-dressed juniors. If I didn’t know the stakes, I’d be rooting for them. Actually I am rooting for them, in a strange sort of way. Don’t tell my employers, but I’m sort of hoping we lose this case. If we win—that is, if the tribunal finds we did not, by publishing an excerpt from Mark Steyn’s book, expose Muslims to hatred and contempt, or whatever the legalese is—then the whole clanking business rolls on, the stronger for having shown how “reasonable” it can be. Whereas if we lose, and fight on appeal, and challenge the whole legal basis for these inquisitions, then something important will be achieved. Hang on, we’re starting…