Christie Blatchford Succumbs to the Compelling Allure of the "Naive Young Victims" Narrative

I realize that, going strictly on optics, a slightly paunchy middle-aged loudmouth in glasses isn't nearly as appealing as a pair of slim, softer-spoken young "law students" (who have long since passed the bar and become full-fledged attorneys). I had hoped, however, that Christie Blatchford (as able a reporter as Canada has ever produced) would have understood what was really at stake in the Levant libel trial, and wouldn't have reduced it to, in essence, a "bad" Ezra versus "good"/"naïve" Khurrum story.

Mark Steyn sounds disappointed in Blatchford too:

My old friend Christie Blatchford is, I fear, missing something in her reports. Her general pitch is idealistic-young-law-students-vs-right-wing-blowhard. She calls Naseem Mithoowani "a lovely young woman", which she is. I rather enjoyed her company after that "Agenda" show five years ago. But she and Khurrum Awan were also very "formidable", as Julian Porter testified last week, and they were allied to a disreputable and thuggish organization whose audacious goal was to put Islam beyond criticism. It's always important to recognize when somebody is telling you to shut up - as Christie should know, after a group of similarly "lovely young" idealists shut down her speech at the University of Waterloo.

You nailed it, Mark. Blatchford should know better. And for anyone who has been following the free speech war in Canada lo these many years, her apparent inability to grasp its nuances--which, really, are dead simple--is as confounding as it is depressing.