This post is further to my post entitled: Everyone Is Entitled to Privacy, Not Just Judges’ Favourite Strippers. The judge would not grant a publication ban to a Muslim on the same grounds requested by strippers.
O I understand the jurisprudence on publication bans just fine. Replace ‘Muslim’ with ‘stripper’ and you’ll see the double standard. It’s clear who Canadian judges prefer, and who has and hasn’t Charter rights to protect them from danger, as well as their privacy.
It appears that in the opinion of Canadian jurists, Johns are more dangerous than white supremacists (colonizers) Islamophobes and antisemites. (Rrrreeally!)
You can tell judges here like strippers so much they’ll strip your hijab in the name of the Charter and pretend to be at arm’s length. Heck, they’ll even pretend to love women and minorities as they ban them from participation in government and prosecute them for holding different opinions. Like the ‘radical’ opinion that everyone is entitled to privacy, not just strippers.
Publication ban’s off, so please be responsible, read everything and ask questions. I can speak for myself thank you very much. Since they lifted the ban, they’re responsible for any harm that comes from my unapologetic exercise of free speech.
Bottom-line: no red Indian judge. No judicial notice of genocide. Just red-stained judges’ seats and robes and victimization of European colonizers.