The quote is from Kathy Shaidle who has a plethora of links regarding Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant testifying before Parliament.  Ezra has the YouTube videos of the testimony encouraging Parliament to investigate the Canadian Human Rights Commission and abolish Section 13.

Part 1.

Watch it in its entirety.  You have to know with Levant and Steyn that it will be fantastic.

A conservative Canadian MP, Rob Anders, has ticked off a muslim group after publishing a brochure which stated that it is “illegal to hold opinions that offend radical muslim activists”. The Muslim Council of Calgary claim that Anders is spreading disinformation. Tell that to Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn. Canada.com

CALGARY — A political pamphlet from a Conservative MP that urges changes to federal human rights legislation has raised the ire of Calgary’s largest Muslim organization, which views the dispatch to residents as inflammatory and divisive.

David Liepert, spokesman for the Muslim Council of Calgary, contends Calgary West’s Rob Anders crossed the line and made inaccurate statements unfairly targeting the Muslim community in a pamphlet that arrived earlier this month at some homes in the riding. The longtime MP, however, disputes the contention that his pamphlet is inflammatory.

In an Anders’ communique, one of 10 different versions mailed out, he claims: “It is now illegal to hold opinions that offend radical Muslim activists,” and “under Section 13 of the so-called ‘human rights’ code, Canadians have been prosecuted for holding personal beliefs which offend radical Muslim imams and liberal activists.”

A person claiming to be a mole in the CHRC has come forward, and is taking credit for leaking sensitive information and documents. There is no way to corroborate this information, so the jury is still out as to whether this is legit or not. If this is real, it will be interesting to see if Jennifer Lynch spontaneously combusts from this news.

I am a CHRC dissenter. I am the reason why Marc Lemire shut down the Freedomsite Message board only 1 month after Richard Warman’s complaint was filed and over 3 months before he ever received a copy.

I am also the reason that Mr. Lemire was able to make direct requests for disclosure of documents that the Commission didn’t even realize “outsiders” knew they had.

I am also the reason that specific questions were led to Commission witnesses in the Warman v. Lemire case.

h/t Blazing Cat Fur

Special Agent ‘Dick’ was present when David Icke was assaulted with a pie in the face at a book signing. The reason for the pie in the face ? The instigators thought that when Icke referred to Reptilians in his books, that was a ‘codeword’ for Jews ! Ha Ha !
Maybe they should throw a pie at cast members of the Seinfeld show due to their use of a codeword for Jews, which happens to be ‘Canadians’. Here’s a documentary created and narrated by a Jewish fellow named Ronson, who Icke allowed to come on the tour, and who stabbed Icke in the back by attempting to re-inforce the Reptiles=Jews theory at the end of the documentary.I’m also including this vid so you can get a good look at Special Agent ‘DICKs’ demeanor. [

The text commentary that follows was cut and pasted from the youtube video, I did not write it.

Do Government employees post hate speech online? Yes they do! Canadian Tax-Payers are footing the bill for this “rogue operation” which has already spawned hundreds of disgusting and hateful posts.

The state now encourages attacks on our freedoms from outside the courtroom via the various Human Rights Commissions throughout our fine country. With no true requirements related to evidence or burden of proof and with cases decided without an experienced Judge. However, when these Quasi-Judicial Rulings are filed in a Court of Law, they inherit the power of the Court. Failure to comply can and has resulted in jail sentences.

One single person, Richard Warman, is responsible for the majority of all Human Rights Commission “Hate Speech” cases in Canada. In fact, Richard Warman is making a pretty penny in all this, Tax Free I might add.
Ezra Levant explains this abortion of common sense singling out the key player behind this rogue “operation”.
“The government pays people, to this day, to go online and act like Nazis”
Ezra Levant

“Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I dont give it any value.” —Canadian Human Rights Investigator Dean Steacy, responding to the question “What value do you give freedom of speech when you investigate?”

F**k You! I can say what I want to say.

Good news for Canadians like Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant. Calgary Herald via Jihad Watch

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has ruled that Section 13, Canada’s much-criticized human rights hate speech law, is an unconstitutional violation of the Charter right to free expression because of its penalty provisions.

The decision released Wednesday morning by tribunal chair Athanasios Hadjis appears to strip the Canadian Human Rights Commission of its controversial legal mandate to pursue hate on the Internet, which it has strenuously defended against complaints of censorship.

It also marks the first major failure of Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, an anti-hate law that was conceived in the 1960s to target racist telephone hotlines, then expanded in 2001 to the include the entire Internet, and for the last decade used almost exclusively by one complainant, activist Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman….

In another surprising defeat for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, Marc Lemire has claimed victory over professional nuisance, Richard Warman. Even more surprising, is that the Human Rights Commission has found that Section 13, Canada’s hate speech law is a violation of the constitutional right to free speech.

I have determined that Mr. Lemire contravened s. 13 of the Act in only one of the instances alleged by Mr. Warman, namely the AIDS Secrets article. However, I have also concluded that s. 13(1) in conjunction with ss. 54(1) and (1.1) are inconsistent with s. 2(b) of the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. The restriction imposed by these provisions is not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter.

Since a formal declaration of invalidity is not a remedy available to the Tribunal (see Cuddy Chicks Ltd. V. Ontario (Labour Relations Board), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 5), I will simply refuse to apply these provisions for the purposes of the complaint against Mr. Lemire and I will not issue any remedial order against him (see Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Martin, 2003 SCC 54 at paras. 26-7).

Blazing Cat Fur has been following this story, and has an excellent collection of links and comments over at his site.

Zionist-Occupied Canadian Human Rights Commission on the Right to Freedom of Speech: “EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!”.

Henry Makow, English professor, and inventor of the popular board game Scruples, is having his Human Rights violated by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. This mild-mannered truth-seeker can’t be allowed to roam free, polluting young minds with dangerous notions such as Facts! Truth! History! Reality! Reverence for God! and Respect for Debate! In Canada, only those who speak correctly have freedom of speech.

Please check out his books here:

http://www.cruelhoax.ca/

I highly recommend Illuminati: The Cult that Hijacked the World.

His website:

http://www.savethemales.ca/

Even if his site and books were “offensive”, I would still support his right to free expression. However, I see nothing offensive or “hateful” there. Which powers has he offended? If one suggests that in Canada the likes of the Bronfmanns and Aspers and other Human Rights racketeers have too much power, and then their hacks come down on you, does that prove you’re right?

Makow feels that the Zionist part of the Illuminati scheme is dangerous and destructive for his fellow Jews. Apparently in Canada that level of love and concern will incur the wrath of the professional wankers and scam-artists at the Jewish Canadian Congress, and the Masonic Jahbullon-worshipping B’nai Brith thugs.

Makow’s dangerous scribblings:

“The Illuminati prefer hatred to Love. … They pretend to be moral. … Hiroshima, Dresden, Auschwitz, Cambodia and Rwanda were sacrifices to their Satanic god.”

If these thin-skinned bozos can’t take a little bit of well-intentioned criticism, how are they gonna be able to stand an eternity of getting buggered in Hell by the Devil’s spiked dick? May God grant mercy.

Here are some interview mp3’s from 2005 regarding World Zionism and Feminism:

http://www.iamthewitness.com/archive.php?dir=audio%2FHenry.Makow%2F

And on Feminism from a 2007 interview:

http://www.archive.org/details/BK_and_HenryMakow_Feminism_12Jun07

Another article on Henry:

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=792

So judge for yourself if Makow is PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER ONE and deserves to have a Seal of Solomon branded on his forehead and be driven out of town by a pitchfork wielding mob…

Canada’s a funny place. Every year they freeze more and more, but Global Warming is almost the state cult. And professional baby killers [number two in this list of Great Canayjin Heroes] get honorary degrees, while harmless wordsmiths have the dogs let loose on them.

From Henry’s site:

Zionist Lobby Holds “Human Rights” Hostage

By Henry Makow, Ph.D.

“Human rights”

The Human Rights Commission, which bills itself as a “quasi judicial” body, is lobbied intensely by the B’nai B’rith, the Canadian Jewish Congress and four other Zionist organizations. (The CJC has a four-man office in Ottawa.These schmoozers have reported countless meetings with CHRC since 1996.)

The CHRC then forwards the Zionists’ complaints to the “Tribunal” which prides itself for being an impartial court. But the Tribunal has never refused to hear a case, NO MATTER HOW BASELESS. Nor has any complaint been settled in favor of the defendant.

“A court where the rulings go only one way is the very definition of a show trial,” writes The Ottawa Citizen. “These institutions should be the source of shame to Canadians.” (Dec.9 2007)

ATTACK ON HENRYMAKOW.COM

This website is the subject of a Tribunal. The CJC goal is to silence my criticism of Zionism and the New World Order. The pretext is that I foment hatred against Jews. But this website does not criticize Jews, only organized Jewry i.e. Zionism and their sponsors, Illuminati bankers. It also alerts Jews to a possible hidden agenda in Judaism that puts them in jeopardy.

That I, the son of holocaust survivors, would foment hatred against myself, my family and other Jews is nonsensical. But, in our increasingly Orwellian world, I stand accused of this absurdity. This is their lame pretext for crude political censorship and persecution.

Surely, a fundamental human right is to identify your enemy rather than have him define it for you. A human right is to disassociate from evil, so you aren’t blamed for it. A human right is to warn people who are being misled.

The Canadian Jewish Congress confirms by its actions that it is part of a conspiracy to distort reality.

For example, it wants to remove an article entitled: “Soviet Agents Designed IMF, World Bank UN.” Why? The Illuminati conspiracy is also behind Communism.

SATANIST LOBBY

Many Jews are waking up to the fact that the CJC is an Illuminati (i.e. Satanist) lobby. In 2000, the CJC demanded the removal of the Lord’s Prayer from public schools, town councils and legislatures.

“Why is a perfunctory recitation of a generic prayer a threat [to them]?” Ezra Levant, a Jewish lawyer asked. “Why is the Christian Canada that was attractive to Jewish immigrants in the 1900’s so unattractive today?…Jews have succeeded in Canada not despite its Christian traditions but because of them.”

Similarly, the CJC champions other Illuminati causes like global warming and homosexual privilege. Why did the CJC go to court for a gay teacher who was fired from a private Christian college for not living up to its moral code? Levant asks.

“That suit had nothing to do with promoting Judaism — which forbids homosexual acts — or protecting the interests of Jewish schools, which would have fired such a teacher too. But it had everything to do with driving religion out of Canadian law.”

The CJC constantly conflicts with Canadian Jews. Professor David Noble of York University is suing the CJC for $25 million for defamation after he exposed their subversion of York University. “They think they have bought themselves a university. They haven’t.”

But when Noble campaigned to keep his university open on Jewish holidays, the usually obstreperous CJC accepted without demur. Diversity trumps Judaism apparently.

A Canadian Jewish group concerned with justice for Palestinians was denied affiliation with the CJC. It questioned “the CJC’s right to speak for the Jewish community if it excludes legitimate points of view shared by many Jews in Canada.”

THE BIZARRO WORLD OF THE CHRC TRIBUNAL

“Abandon all hope all ye who enter here.” The watchword for Dante’s Inferno also applies to the innocent “hater” entering the Tribunal process. Here are just some of the “Hallmarks of a Hate message” the Tribunal applies to him:

1. In determining if someone is fomenting hate or contempt against a targeted group, his intent is not a factor. In other words, his words can be taken out of context. And, the Tribunal will decide what effect they have had.

2. The targeted group is described as a “powerful menace” taking control of the major institutions of society and depriving others of their freedom of speech etc. ( As in, “Tribunals?”)

3. The hate messages use true stories, news reports and references to purportedly reputable sources. (Their information doesn’t count.)

4. The target group is portrayed as preying on children. (800,000 disappear every year.)

5. The target group is blamed for the problems of the world. (No, these problems happen randomly.)

6. The target group is violent by nature, innately evil, and without redeeming characteristics. (They like children. Does that count?)

7, The messages make light of past persecution of the target group. (Let’s hear it about it one more time.)

8. The messages make reference to a “world conspiracy.” (Ever heard of Communism? Guess Richard Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover were “haters.”)

The issue in my case is who is the target group? Not Jews in general, but Masonic bankers and their allies, not all Jews: Rothschild, Warburg, Rockefeller, Schiff, Baring, Lazard, Erlanger, Warburg, Schroder, Selingman, the Speyers, Forbes, Pinchot, Carnegie, Dupont, Russell, Kerr, Collins, Cecil, Bush, Mirabaud, Malet, Kuhn & Loeb. The Canadian Jewish Congress indirectly answers to these families.

CONCLUSION

These “hallmarks” were written by lawyers not historians. They obviously looked at an “anti Semitic” web site and reverse engineered their criteria. Now they force all critics into this hatemonger mold.

The Canadian Jewish Congress does not represent Canadian Jews. It is a registered Zionist lobby tasked with keeping Jews in line and promoting the Illuminati agenda.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunals are products of the Zionist lobby and Illuminati finance. They don’t represent the Canadian people. They are an existential threat to our freedom.

As children we all wanted to silence our critics, especially when we were wrong. We wanted them declared insane. But when we grew up we learned that free speech and debate were the best guarantee of discovering the truth.

The Zionists at the CJC never grew up and now provide a living example of authoritarianism. They hate the truth. Think USSR, Nazi Germany, Communist China.

Let’s hope their lackeys at the CHRC will realize they are betraying their countrymen. Just because they don’t yet know about the Illuminati conspiracy doesn’t mean there isn’t one. have become dirty words in Canada because Zionists determine who will have them. Welcome to the future.

[CHRC Grilled by Parliamentary Committee (Youtube)]

This is an excellent interview with Henry Makow, who is now targeted by the NWO Canadian “Human Rights Commission” Kangaroo Court:

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2009/07jul/RIR-090716-hmakow.mp3

(I think the show is downloadable for a while and is then only available to subscribers…)

Henry Makow – Free Speech Threatened in Canada, Zionism & The Elite Satanic Bankers

July 16, 2009

“We have writer Henry Makow with us to talk about the current threat to freedom of speech in Canada. We discuss hate laws, “Human rights”, political correctness, the Human Rights Commission in Canada and the Canadian Jewish Congress. Henry’s website henrymakow.com is threatened to be shutdown because of the topics he writes about: Zionism, the Illuminati, the “Satanic Elite bankers”, WWII history, feminism and many other topics. Topics Discussed: Censoring of Henry’s website henrymakow.com, Judaism and Zionism, The Canadian Human Rights Commision, Judaism and Zionism, B’nai B’rith, Satanic Conspiracy, AIPAC North, Steven Harper, Free speech, The Banning of Knowledge, radicalpress.ca, Ernst Zundel, Political Correctness, Communism, The Canadian Media, What defines the Elite as Satanic, Transformation of humanity, how are we being changed? Sex, Homosexuality, Religious View on Sex, Nation, Religion, God, Race, Solipsism, Reality, Truth, Love, National Revival, New Age and much more.”

http://www.henrymakow.com/

http://www.cruelhoax.ca/

[Note: I don't endorse this show, Red Ice, in general]

Trevor Phillips, the charismatic CEO of Britain’s Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is in trouble – his senior staff are leaving in droves and U.K. media are once again questioning not just Phillips’ leadership but the nature of his organization. Founded in 1976 by a Labour government as the Commission for Racial Equality, the supra body was once three organizations dealing respectively with the promotion of equality between racial groups, disabled people, and gender equality.  The U.K. Commission now reels from a public feud and many questions about its governance.

Canada’s own federal Human Rights Commission, a quasi-judicial body, formed at about the same time – 1977 – and also covers a wide array of interests – women, Aboriginal people, the disabled and “visible minorities.” And as in Britain, both the federal body and certainly its provincial cousins routinely come under fire; a recent example, covered here by greenjenny: Mark Steyn (on behalf of The West!) versus, it sometimes seemed, the entire world of The Other.

Mr. Phillips’ recent troubles: a “radical, unpredictable thinker,” excellent public communicator but one with “poor organization skills.” That’s The Guardian’s Jackie Ashley; she calls for his head claiming what’s needed is a more diplomatic, appeasing central figure. Check out the Daily Mail (hostile to the very idea of a tax funded equality commission), plus the Times (a CEO explains why he quit), the Independent (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown on Phillips as all light, no weight) and the list goes on.

Mr. Phillips, in his last visit to Canada received laudatory press from our  media for his “get tough on too much sippy-sappy-multiculti”, particularly his advocacy for equality rights trumping “cultural” rights. But  his personal style would never be tolerated in Canada; combative in its refusal to shy away from calling racism, racism – not soft peddling with my preferred word, ethnocentrism, the R word being rather like Godzilla’s foot – it squelches everything in its path. More than anything, Phillips’  leadership style is now in question.

Many in his organization accuse him of “playing the race card” by not resigning in favour of Kay Hampton, a South African born anti-racism advocate. And a white woman. More significantly, his professional dealings have been caught in the U.K. media’s ferocious “public perks” dragnet. If only Canada’s media market combined both speak-your mind crankiness (which we have in spades) with a true diversity of voice (which we lack). We might get a more thorough airing of these sorts of messy but necessary discussions. Does Canada need government tax funded human rights and equality commissions and tribunals?

CBC – In a move that supporters of same-sex marriage supporters swore would never happen, Orville Nichols, a Saskatchewan marriage commissioner has lost his appeal against a human rights ruling for refusing to marry a same-sex couple.

A tribunal set up by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ruled that Nichols did not have the right to refuse service based on his personal beliefs, and ordered him to pay M.J. $2,500 in compensation.

Nichols appealed that ruling, arguing that his religious beliefs should be protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

But in a 39-page decision dated July 17, Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Janet McMurty dismissed Nichols’ argument, concluding that the human rights tribunal was “correct in its finding that the commission had established discrimination and that accommodation of Mr. Nichols’ religious beliefs was not required.”

At the human rights hearing in 2007, M.J. testified that although he and his partner were married by another commissioner, he was devastated by Nichols’ reaction.

The Canadian government seems to be moving towards a place where no religious beliefs will be tolerated in the work place. Orville Nichols was not the only marriage commissioner in Saskatchewan, and another commissioner more than happily married the same-sex couple. Regardless of someone’s views on the issue of same-sex marriage, the Human Rights Tribunal has effectively stated that Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms no longer applies.

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:  (a) freedom of conscience and religion.

How long will it be until the assault begins on other areas of conscience and religion?

The Catholic Register -An openly homosexual man has brought a human rights complaint against Peterborough Bishop Nicola De Angelis, and 12 parishioners at St. Michael’s parish in Cobourg, Ont. This comes after Jim Corcoran was asked to give up his position as an Altar server at Sunday masses. He is open about his homosexuality, and lives with another openly homosexual man, but claims to live a chaste life in line with church teachings.

Having visiting Mr. Corcoran’s blog, I am left wondering how a man goes from this;

National Post – The Canadian Human Rights Commission really shouldn’t let Jennifer Lynch speak in public. Her recent attacks on her critics stated that they were both misinformed and uninformed. Here is part of the rebuttal from Russ Hiebert, Conservative MP for South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale.

Recently, Canadian Human Rights Commission chief Jennifer Lynch criticized me for relying on “one source that is full of misinformation,” in my parliamentary study of the CHRC. It may surprise Ms. Lynch to learn that the source of my “misinformation” is her own commission and its companion body, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

Every question I raised in committee about the lack of due process and an ethics code for commission employees, and the absence of rules of evidence, came from commission and tribunal documents, many of which are currently available on the commission’s own website (www.chrc-ccdp.ca).

The transcripts of tribunal hearings provide telling evidence of the wayward approach the commission’s investigators take in prosecuting their cases. Recent hearings, such as the Marc Lemire case, have revealed that current CHRC investigator Dean Steacy and former CHRC investigator Richard Warman regularly posted neo-Nazi diatribes under assumed names on white supremacist websites. Further, uncontradicted expert evidence presented before the hearing demonstrated that investigator Steacy illegitimately used an unsuspecting private citizen’s wireless Internet service to post his offensive comments.

Perhaps not coincidentally, the commission asked the tribunal to exclude the media from the hearing that day. Fortunately, for the sake of accountability, a secret hearing was rejected and we know more about the CHRC’s inner workings.

Like any commissar with far too much power, Jennifer Lynch has resorted to pathetic attempts to discredit her opponents in a vain attempt to remain in power. One can only hope that the federal government will act on this issue soon.

The Hamilton Spectator – As more details begin to emerge about the complaint brought against Hamilton transit, it appears that once again the Ontario Human Rights Commission is acting in a heavy handed and unreasonable manner. It seems that the OHRC simply will not learn from the recent public relation disasters and growing public outrage, and continue to bring pointless complaints against well meaning people and agencies.

For those that haven’t heard of the recent complaint, it was made on behalf of the visually impaired in Thunder Bay, Hamilton and Sudbury. It is demanding that transit drivers call out every stop on their route, regardless if anyone who is visually impaired is actually on the public transit. While on the surface this does sound somewhat like a reasonable accommodation, the facts in Hamilton will once again make the average tax payer marvel at how the OHRC can waste money and time.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission has given Hamilton 30 days to train 400 drivers, to call out 20,000 stops. That’s right, 30 days to train hundreds of people to memorize the names of 20,000 stops. What truly makes this pointless is that Hamilton Transit will have a fully automated stop call-out system in place in September. And the OHRC is fully aware of this fact, and still chose to bring this complaint against them.

It amazes me how the Ontario Human Rights Commission has nothing better to do, then to bring pointless complaints against municipalites. Does the fact that Hamilton is spending over 3 million on this system, and will have it up in less than 2 months mean nothing to them? Is there no reasonable accomodation given to people by this council, or will it always take the form of ‘comply now or else’. If this is how the commission will continue to behave, I can only hope that Tim Hudak does away with this pointless, arrogant commission.

Toronto Star – In a move that should inspire fear in all of Toronto’s landlords, a report is being released by the Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation (CERA), regarding the rampant ‘human rights violations’ occurring in Toronto.

“I think it’s fair to say most people are not aware there is a human rights component to housing,” [Barbara] Hall said in an interview.

“The commission has never focused on this issue and it’s something we and other commissions in Canada are just beginning to investigate.”

The study’s findings translate into tens of thousands of Torontonians potentially facing discrimination, including about 6,000 single parents, 2,000 of whom are single black parents like Stewart.

This is just what Ontario needs, a massive Human Rights Commission crusade aimed at destroying several thousand landlords livelihoods. The report seems to make no distinction between individuals renting out their basements, or large multi-unit rental buildings.

The problem is, that if these landlords were not selective in who they rented to, they would be faced with the even more onerous Ontario Landlord and Tenant Act. So if they did accept a tenant that could not pay rent, caused damage, or did anything else detrimental to the property, it would take months to evict that tenant. And many of these landlords do not have the financial stability to afford a tenant that does not pay rent for months on end.

The report is due out today, and I’m sure Barbara Hall will be quick to mount a campaign against landlords great and small.

As Blazing Cat Fur reported earlier today, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal has ruled against businesses attempting to keep homeless people off of their sidewalks and alleyways. While homelessness is not protected under the Human Rights Code, Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU) argued;

“that the homeless are disproportionately comprised of Aboriginal people and those with mental disabilities, then their allegations could, if proven, establish discrimination by race, ancestry, colour and disability.”

So according to the Human Rights Tribunal, you no longer have the right to keep your front steps clear of the homeless. Just accept them and the damage they cause, or face the wrath of a Human Rights Tribunal

Read the Vancouver Sun article here.

SteynOnline – Unfortunately, Jennifer Lynch has not made any speeches lately about how the citizens of this great country are being mean to her.  But since it has been a few days since I have written about the Canadian Human Rights Commission, here is an excellent article written by Mark Steyn. It details the inequality and bias of the Canadian Human Rights system.

The article also references fellow thought criminal Blazing Cat Fur.

According to a New York state newspaper, The Mohawk Council of Akwesasne has filed a Canadian Human Rights complaint for what they call the illegal closure of the Seaway International Bridge. It will be interesting to see how the CHRC reacts to this complaint, as border crossings are covered under international law.

Read the complete article here.

A National Post article detailing the dispute can be found here.

The Montreal Gazette – In a positive sign that the Human Rights Commission debate is spreading through Quebec, here is an article today in the Montreal Gazette. This is an issue of free speech that should transcend party lines. (Unless your name is Bob Rae)

This story needs to come with a bit of a disclaimer. I fully support creating an accessible society for anyone who is handicapped. I just don’t support the Human Rights Commissions heavy handed and arbitrary rulings.

Read the story here.

I have a few problems with the human rights commission ruling on this one. Why is the Commission ruling on something that is covered under the provincial building code? How can they force a judgment against one hotel, while ignoring all of the other hotels in that town? Was there any proof provided that this was the only hotel that was feasible for this woman to stay at?

I look forward to the day when the Human Rights Commission requires some burden of proof.

Tim Hudak, an Ontario MPP for the Progressive Conservatives has won the Tory leadership race. This will come as good news to opponents of the Human Rights Tribunal. Tim Hudak announced back in May, that if elected he would scrap the Human Rights Tribunal. He has been vocal in his criticism of the nuisance claims, and the rampant abuses of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. Tim shows the kind of common sense that Jennifer Lynch should have showed a long time ago. Things like maybe there should be evidence, and maybe it should resemble some kind of real court. Maybe if Tim Hudak is successful, there won’t be any more Human Rights Tribunals based on mere hurt feelings.

A quote from Tim Hudak that sums up the ills of the whole human rights experience.

“For too long, individual rights have been trampled and ignored by an increasingly dysfunctional Human Rights bureaucracy. The McGuinty government’s system has advanced nuisance claims and denied justice and legitimate complaints, costing individuals and businesses thousands of dollars in unnecessary costs and clogging the system.”

Read the whole statement here.

http://www.timhudak.ca/index/2009/05/12/hudak-vows-to-scrap-human-rights-tribunal/

Jennifer Lynch's Number One Enemy

Blazing Cat Fur

http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/

An incendiary feline has to occupy one of the highest spots on Jennifer Lynch’s now infamous enemies list. There is a great piece on Bob Rae there today, and even a quote from yours truly. Check it out.

Legal experts pan human right report

http://www.wcr.ab.ca/news/2009/0629/legal062909.shtml

This report is a few days old now, but brings up some excellent points about the flaws in the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Bob Rae should read this, and realize that people from all sides of the political spectrum are criticizing the CHRC. (Bob, it’s not just a Conservative thing)

The Lynch Files

http://missnixon.wordpress.com/

The Lynch Files is an interesting new blog, dealing with the supposed list of enemies that Richard Nixon, I mean Jennifer Lynch is compiling. At least Richard Nixon had the decency to do that in private.

Fresh from being not so politely asked to leave Sri Lanka, Bob Rae has thrown his support behind the beleaguered Canadian Humans Right Commission (CHRC). Reeling from recent botched interviews and public relation nightmares, many news writers and bloggers have been calling for its abolishment. All this opposition to the CHRC has not escaped the notice of Conservative MP’s, and now some are asking some serious questions about the Commission’s role in Canadian society.

Here is a comment from the Liberal website, that shows it’s really Bob Rae that doesn’t get it.

“This is a Prime Minister who just doesn’t get it. Human Rights Commissions, like the Ontario Commission, provide a vital resource to the community. They are an avenue to handle claims and disputes in a manner that is far more financially accessible than litigation,”

I’ll have to agree with Bob Rae on this, that it is far more financially accessible than any litigation. I’ll even go so far as to say, that might be the understatement of the week. As it stands now, the accuser has a pretty sweet deal. Any expenses linked to transportation and lodging are paid for. In fact, they are even paid to testify. This really doesn’t provide any disadvantage to lodging baseless, or as they say in the legal field, frivolous and vexatious complaints.

Now on the other side of that, the accused has no mechanisms to aid in their defense. None of the accused costs are defrayed, and even if they won, (Which they can’t, since the CHRC has a 100% conviction rate) none of their costs could be claimed. Many of the accused, which have done nothing worse than just hurting someone’s feelings, have racked up legal bills exceeding 50,000 dollars.

So yes, the CHRC is financially more accessible than the court systems to the accuser. But in the case of most defendants, they will be facing personal bankruptcy without any of the most basic of defenses provided by the courts in this country.

“Mr. Rae pointed out that, unlike this Conservative government, the Liberal Party of Canada is committed to human rights and the right to free speech.”

As long as the Canadian Human Rights Commission agrees with that speech of course.

See the full article here.

http://www.liberal.ca/en/newsroom/media-releases/15970_harper-conservatives-must-come-clean-with-canadians-on-the-future-of-the-canadian-human-rights-commission

Major General Sir Isaac Brock

The one good thing that can be said about the excesses of government, is that sometimes it motivates people to action. I’ve been complaining to everyone that will listen lately about the CHRC (Canadian Human Rights Commission). I thought that I should give my friends and family a break, and start to actually post some of these complaints online.

I’ve decided to name this blog after the greatest defender of Canada, Sir Isaac Brock. General Brock believed that all Canadian’s could come together in the defense of their nation, and I still believe that to be true to this day.

This blog will actually be about any excesses of government, and I’m hoping to bring in quite a few different topics eventually. But the recent debacles on CTV and Jennifer Lynch’s bizarre rants are just too juicy to pass up.

Just to start with, here are some great links to bring you up to speed on the strange world of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

Ezra Levant’s Blog

http://ezralevant.com/

This is the man that has been leading the charge against the commission after the charges from him republishing the Muhammad cartoons.

Jennifer Lynch’s Speech

http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/media_room/speeches-en.asp?id=551

Here is a link to Jennifer Lynch’s latest speech. There are definitely some interesting comments in there. I may actually be on an list now for posting this in my blog.

CHRC Debate on CTV

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/power-play/friday-june-12/#clip182575

The bizarre “debate” on CTV between Ezra Levant and an employee of the CHRC on CTV.

More to come soon.