The Investigators are investigated!

[burk48237]

Earlier, I posted a thread hear on the CHRC (Canadian Human Rights Commission) show trial of Mark Steyn and McCleans Magazine here:

Is it "Hate speech" if

Well it seems the CHRC has err "overstepped" it's investigation jurisdiction a bit by hacking in to a private citizens computer to prevent it's own evidence planting and entrapment of one of it's plaintiffs from getting traced. The complainant (Richard Wermar) used the CHRC's own computers to post on an internet forum and promote "hate speech". In order to prevent his IP address from getting traced he hacked in to a private citizens computer and transmitted all his posts on the forum which were intended to entrap the blogger into some form of hate speech. In other words the CHRC posted hate speech in order to get the plaintiff to agree and commit the "crime" of hate speech. Now the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) is investigating the investigators.

http://ezralevant.com/2008/05/rcmp-l...gation-in.html

A few facts about the CHRC:

The CHRC has held hearings on 300 cases of "hate speech", 299 have been found guilty. The only one found innocent was the Canadian Nazi party, because they don't exist! I would call a court that found 299 out of 300 cases guilty a kangaroo court.

ALL of the complaints filed since 2002 have been filed by ONE complainant (Richard Wermer) who while a former CHRC member is now a private citizen. And yet it now appears he has been given full access to all of the CHRC's investigation apparatus. In essence the CHRC is a private tribunal set up for ONE citizen.

While the CHRC can not implement criminal penalties, it's budget is paid for by the country so it has unlimited resources to investigate while it's plaintiffs have to use their own resources to fight the CHRC's decisions. The CHRC can implement civil penalties including telling a magazine, newspaper, on internet editorial what the nature of it's content can be or to cease publishing, and can implement heavy fines to those who don't comply. They have already closed down several internet news sources in Canada.

The CHRC could threaten to shut down any web site in Canada including Talk Bass if all of the content didn't meet it's approval

http://ezralevant.com/2008/05/rcmp-l...gation-in.html

http://winnipeg.indymedia.org/item.php?13379S

http://www.freedominion.com.pa/phpBB....php?p=1183408

[bmc]

All of the links are to blogs of peoples opinions and allegations. Who is Ezra Levant?

Where can I find the facts on the success of the CHRC hearings (299/300)?

[bmc]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/...-internet.html

Good story, Burk. It'll be interesting to see how this evolves.

[MakiSupaStar]

I've been investigating a sexy korean chick. There's something there. I might need to explore this a little more. I'll keep you posted.

[Kelly Lee]

I guess there is no such thing as free speech in Canada, eh?

[burk48237]

Originally Posted by Kelly Lee

I guess there is no such thing as free speech in Canada, eh?

Well, if the Canadian government has an investigative arm with the power to shut down "hate speech" with no qualifications for incitement of violence or libel (truthfulness) I would say yes.

The case against the Nazi Party was actually based partly on Bathroom graffiti! And the case brought against Steyn is based partly on quotes of an Islamic Imam. In other words Steyn was accused of Hate speech and Islamaphobia because he repeated the words of an Islamic leader? In Ezra Levants case, Ezra took the offensive and outed some of the hateful anti-Semitic speech of one of his accusers on a Blog. But unlike his accuser, he didn't try to get the blog shut down. the accuser dropped the complaint out of embarrassment. A nation with freedom of speech does not try to regulate "offensive" opinion on line or in printed publications. I'm part Jewish, and I have no problem with Mein Kempf or Elders of the Protocols of Zion being available to the public, as long as I have a right to expose people who are promoting hate. Real Freedom of Speech includes speech we don't agree with.

[bmc]

Originally Posted by burk48237

Real Freedom of Speech includes speech we don't agree with.

Like this?

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS...man/index.html

[burk48237]

Originally Posted by bmc

Like this?

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS...man/index.html

Actually no, If you look at my first post, I drew a distinction between, speech we disagree with and speech that is designed to incite violence. If someone says,"We need to keep an eye on the Jews-they control everything" that is anti-Semitic and it is certainly hate speech, it is also a lie (something which can be dealt with civilly) but it is far different from someone saying "god commands us to kill the Jews". The speech Senator Lieberman is trying to ban falls under the later category. Those websites are used for the express purpose of recruiting people to kill others. The distinction is huge. The US courts have said "freedom of speech doesn't extend to the right to yell fire in a crowded theater" because that endangers people. What the Canadians CHRC is saying is, you can't yell "it's a bad movie" in a crowded theater. That endangers no one.

[burk48237]

Here's Steyns latest, apparently the CHRC has been posting hate speech on various blogs throughout the country so they can elicit a response to prosecute.

"The evidence suggests that it's the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission. Their weird fantasist employees spread far more hate than they ever prosecute (including at foreign websites beyond their jurisdiction). As Ezra Levant writes:

The Canadian Human Rights Commission has posted literally hundreds of bigoted comments on white supremacist websites, like Stormfront and Vanguard News Network. CHRC staff became members of these groups under codenames, and then spewed forth bigoted venom for years.

It's illegal to post "hate messages" under Section 13 - unless you're a Canadian "human rights" agent or their favourite ex-colleague Richard Warman, in which case Section 13 does not apply and the world is your oyster. Internet Nazi Richard Warman can disseminate hate on a scale even world-class haters like Ezra Levant and I could never contemplate. Ezra today notes the Pieman's post of gratuitous anti-Hillel messages. Hillel is a Jewish youth group - I'll be appearing at a meeting for Hillel in Vancouver on Monday and am proud to do so. But even the most determined anti-Semite must be impressed at the nice little racket Richard Warman's got going:

First, he gets paid by Canadian taxpayers to spend his days posting anti-Semitic messages on neo-Nazi websites.

Then, he collects five-figure tax-free payments for the "pain and distress" he's "suffered" from reading the neo-Nazi websites he's a member of.

Finally, he gets honoured by the Canadian Jewish Congress and other Jewish groups with prestigious awards for being Canada's greatest crusader against anti-Semitism.

Nice work if you can get it. Unfortunately, under Section 13 (Warman's Law), he's the only one who's allowed to get it"

[iamlowsound]

The CHRC is a joke. You should read the article that Steyn wrote bashing the CHRC about three weeks before he got in trouble with them. I am a really big fan of Steyn's writing and subscribe to McLeans mainly for his articles. The whole thing is just pathetic and I am ashamed that my tax dollars pay for it.

lowsound

[burk48237]

It appears you can add the Canadian Parliament under the approval of the Justice Minister to the list of the investigators starting an investigation of the CHRC.


http://ezralevant.com/2008/05/govern...inquiry-i.html