Scary, nasty guy and Liberal Party propaganda hitman Warren Kinsella, above, and in closeup. Looks like a pleasant, amicable, easy-to-get-along-with, non-hateful fellow, doesn't he? Yep. Mr. Nice, Mr. Non-Hateful, indeed.
Story here. I noticed that in Kinsella's Statement of Claim against Levant, Kinsella doesn't claim that the statements Levant made about him are false. He doesn't deny working for the entity Levant stated he works for. Guess it's true, then, that he works for the entity which Levant so criticizes. Therefore, Levant opined about Kinsella's working for the entity. Guess it struck a sore spot for Kinsella, an inconvenient opinion, some Charter-protected fair comment, which Kinsella nevertheless seeks to silence with a SLAPP suit (Cue the violins!). It's hypocritical of Warren Kinsella alleging that Ezra Levant intended to injure him somehow with his opinion of Kinsella. That it's hypocritical of Kinsella is my fair comment based on my observations of Kinsella's own public behavior and expressions regarding others over the years. And this fair comment is protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Just as Kinsella apparently, to me, believes that his opinion that all sorts of innocent folks he's accused of being nasty things such as "racists" and "haters" is protected by the Charter as well. But it appears (Warren, please note that I said "appears", so stay cool, bro; don't blow another gasket) to me that he believes that he should be protected by the Charter but Levant shouldn't. And this is an opinion that I doubt would be ignored by a judge, or by the Canadian People.
Warren again, above left, with a t-shirt rendering commentary about the President of the United States. What does the bottom line say, "terrorist"? Wonder how Warren would feel if someone called him a terrorist? Oh, that's right- ok to call George Bush (or Stephen Harper, just wait 'til Warren goes after him next) whatever you want, but don't dare say anything not-nice about Warren Kinsella, because Warren Kinsella is obviously somehow specially exempt from having to suffer inconvenient, Charter-protected, fair commentary and opinion of others about him based on his behavior! No idea who the other guy is, but he has a weird expression on his face... guess Warren likes being with people who make weird faces like he does.Why is it supposedly ok for Warren Kinsella to render such commentary, but it's not ok for them to merely issue fair commentary/opinion/criticism based on his behavior?
Since the Nineties, I've witnessed this man on TV, he with a gravely serious countenance, rendering what I believe to be (hey, Warren, please note my indication that this is a statement of belief, not that I allege it as fact, before you get all unhinged and accuse me of making statements that are libellous as opposed to mere opinion of your behavior, like Mr. Levant rendered, mind you; so don't make a fool of yourself) all kinds of outrageous, absurdly, totally false, defamatory, politically and reputationally injurious opinions especially against politicians of conservative orientation, once, most infamously of all, even mocking a Mr. Stockwell Day's religious beliefs, using a stuffed purple dinosaur he brought to a TV studio to be used as a prop. I believe that many folks would consider this behavior to be "hateful". A "Hate crime", it could very well be considered. And a very obviously (he brought the prop to a TV studio in a gym bag with the obvious intent to display it to emphasize his mocking disdain for a person's religious beliefs) premeditated one at that. No doubt the stunt was intended to harm Mr. Day's electoral prospects, for that was (and appears will be again) Mr. Kinsella's job as Liberal Party propaganda hitman.
What a hypocrite. He thinks it's ok to attack others, no doubt, rendering intentionally hurtful opinion using wording to make it sound as if it's fact and I observe that he does it with arrogant, entitlist impunity.
But when others render fair commentary/opinion about him, he can't stand it and seeks to shut them up by taking them to court or at least threatening to, but never following through. He'll call people "racist" without proof, but if anyone were to call him "racist" in precisely the same manner in which he does it to others, he may sue or threaten to sue. What an... asshole of astonishing hypocrisy. And I understand, that, as he indicated in a recent blog post on his website, he's going back to work for the Liberal Party to "render opinion" against the Conservative government of Stephen Harper. What can we expect, then, of a man like Kinsella, in this role? More of the same? Mocking the religious beliefs of JudeoChristians? Calling people "racist" without offering proof? This guy, in my opinion, is scary, scary, scary.
No one need take any lessons, nor criticism from the Grand Ayatollah of Hypocrisy. Otherwise, all sinners would then have to take lessons and criticism from the Devil...
And the Liberal Party is going to be using him as a propagandist, as a political hitman of sorts, to try to make the Canadian Electorate think bad things about the Conservative Party and Stephen Harper. Right? Or what's he going to do for the Liberals, bring them coffee?
The Liberals can have him. He will be yet another liability for them.
