Last month, a parliamentary committee invited Jennifer Lynch, the head of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, to answer questions about her agency’s conduct. She refused to attend, sending in her place a deputy who could not answer key questions put to him by MP Russ Hiebert.
Now that Parliament is safely on summer holidays, Lynch has bravely emerged from her bunker — the CHRC office actually is a bulletproof bunker — to accuse Hiebert of getting his facts wrong.
But it’s Lynch’s version that’s false.
In her July 11 letter to the National Post, Lynch denies that CHRC staff hacked into the Internet account of a private citizen to cover their tracks as they logged into their memberships in neo-Nazi websites. Lynch says both the Privacy Commissioner and the RCMP “found no evidence to support this allegation.”
But that’s not true. The Privacy Commissioner’s staff did not investigate the hacking — that is not within their jurisdiction. They only examined “whether the CHRC improperly collected, used, disclosed or retained personal information about the complainant,” a different and irrelevant question.
And neither did the RCMP declare that there was “no evidence” to the accusation. They investigated for months. Only when the case led them to a U. S.-based Internet server did they drop their investigation rather than pursue it internationally. That’s quite a different thing from exonerating the CHRC.
[More]
Related:
Ezra adds more to the article…
Notes:
My view is that because of what is going on regarding the CHRC and the wide exposure it is getting two things must happen. Lynch must be replaced because she has lost control of her organization and Section 13 of the act must be repealed. Both things need to be done very soon.
My view is that a site full of cops should see the value of going undercover. Maybe someone should ask Ezra who he supports in the long run. As though his involvement in the Reform Party wasn’t enough self-delusion?
Ezra is correct in this matter and Harper will be harmed if he doesn’t deal with the situation. “Undercover” does not equate to breaking the law in order to catch someone.
I will admit there are gray areas with the CHRC but not in this case and it needs to be fixed. They are out of control.
Funny how there have only been white christians convicted under sec 13 by the HRC and no Muslims. Because Muslims never say anything that is likely to “expose a person or persons to hatred and/or contempt”. More than a simple double standard at play here.
Opening the flood gates for the far right will solve this supposed problem how?
“Opening the flood gates for the far right will solve this supposed problem how?”
By using a proper court. We have hate provisions in the Criminal Code and this CHRC stupidity is duplication of effort. It’s not required and it should be dispensed with.
If the courts were doing a good job then there would be no need. But, as many of the same HRC critics often complain, the courts are useless. If you get 6 years for murder, lord only knows what you’ll get for threatening to or encouraging others to do the dirty work.
ward Says:
Funny how there have only been white christians convicted under sec 13 by the HRC and no Muslims.
—————————————————————————–
Hey Ward(and everybody else) read this story.
Even though the story is from England it ain’t no different then here in Canada
http://news.in.msn.com/international/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3072073
Its the same here Mr. G. Authorities turn a blind eye to one groups hate speech, yet turn a microscope on others.
If its a crime for one group or individual then it has to be a crime for others as well, regardless of ethnicity.
It doesn’t help that so many people in this country are indoctrinated to the idea that only whites are guily of racism or intolerance. Wishful thinking or naivity on their part.
Muslims are the entire focus of RW ire towards the HRC. They keep hitting rednecks whose hatred has a legacy on this continent, but they’re not focused enough on the new bogeyman, Muslims. The obvious solution is to form your own committees with phrases like “preservation of Canadian culture”, allowing you to attack any idea or anyone who threatens to disrupt the order.
Historically speaking, there is little chance that an organization dedicated to helping the little guy is going to put hits out on the little guy even if he’s in the wrong. Such is the nature of advocacy.
Re #7. The only difference between appeasement and surrender is time.
ward Says:
It doesn’t help that so many people in this country are indoctrinated to the idea that only whites are guily of racism or intolerance.
——————————————————————————————-
Yes well,the finest example of that would be Cynapse,Ha,Ha,Ha
Weak deflection, Mr. G
Try as you might, I’m not the reciprocal to your white nationalism.
It defies logic why PMSH hasn’t fired this racist lying witch and repealed Section 13. Just what the heck is he scared of?
“Just what the heck is he scared of?”
In short, he’s scared of the Cynapses out there who along with the MSM will accuse him of being racist, of “white nationalism”; for shutting down Human Rights.
There are no Cynapses in Stephen Harper’s base, or at least the ones there are simply willing to look the other way.
Either that or you guys have been fooled like nearly every group of Western partisans that ever existed. If that liberal budget didn’t jog your minds into reality then probably nothing will.
Human rights may mean little to people who have no need for them because of their overwhelming power. Since most of you fit that description I’ll chalk this up to “disparity of awareness”. But if you ever become the hunted you’ll see the need for it rather quickly.
Look at the picture attached to the thread and just TRY to put yourself in someone else’s shoes for a change.
Cynical: the REAL courts act on a complaint. If frivolous, then the complainant pays costs. All of it. Don’t blame our legal system for the direction these CHRC cases went, as none were filed in a REAL court. The complainants went the CHRC route because……? No costs assigned if the case was dismissed. It’s essentially “legal slander” under CHRC rules, no penalties for doing so.
What I have a problem with is that the CHRC assigns costs to a failed defendant, but the opposite is not true. Truth is not a defence under CHRC rules. I won’t pay for one-sided justice . These kangaroo courts follow proper legal processes, or they are gone.
“liberal budget didn’t …”
There’s an argument .. they are too Liberal and they are also too Conservative.
Plus I have “overwhelming power” … which I suppose is why that no matter how hard I work at it, I can’t get a Conservative elected in Toronto in either the PCs or the CPC … maybe I should use my “power” and complain to the HRC for lack of diversity.
By the time you get the CPC ready for Toronto consumption, the Albertan overlords of the party will probably be lobbying to have you kicked out. Don’t you see that you’ve been given a bit of a mission impossible here? You’re trying to sell a party that build its base covertly and overtly on Toronto-hate and small-l liberal hate. Anti-immigration platforms won’t work in a city full of immigrants, nor will anti-intellectual campaigning work in a city that treasures and imports its intellectual capital. The “power” you have is the same power possessed by the heads of the Liberals and NDP, so it the diversity argument won’t help much.
“Anti-immigration platforms won’t work in a city full of immigrants”
Wrong. Pro-Canada platforms won’t work in a city full of immigrants and that is the bottom line. That truth says an awlful lot about where their loyalites lie and the Canadian patriotism of very many people we are letting into this country to eventually become citizens doesn’t it?
What you call pro-Canada others would call anti-immigration because it tends to be against immigrants. That’s the only way a city full of immigrants (ie people who CHOSE to live in the country) could possibly object. The average immigrant had made more sacrifices to be in Canada than most locals ever will, so I don’t buy your “pro Canada” line. Say what you mean – nativist. A lot of Canadians simply expect everything should be handed to them because their ancestors came here umpteen years ago. Most of them aren’t willing to put in the hours of work necessary to make it in Toronto or any economy that isn’t based on whether you are married to X’s daughter or came from the same part of __insert country here__. When I went to my program in Uni, people were surprised I’d made it – not because there weren’t too many of Carib descent there (although there weren’t) but because I was raised locally. Most the program were Indians and Chinese, just as the lower rungs of the white collar business world are converting in that direction.
Even the whites I schooled with usually had direct ties to Russia, Poland or some other recent source of immigrants.
After reading the comments my view remains the same. We use the code to prosecute offenders — not some ad hoc civil bunch of bamboozlers who depend on victimizing people for their living.
If “hate” is out there call a cop. That’s what we employ them for and they don’t need a bunch of woosies to do their job for them.
#20. I think there is a lot of truth in what you say there. But your examples are all about the fat lazy Torontonian establishment (BTW the establishment is no longer just white)… ergo it’s the Liberal party running things here … 22 MPs and 22MPPs. The Conservatives as you say are Western based, a more pioneering spirit, Premier Stelmach is Ukrainian etc.
Conservatives are not anti-immigrant, immigration has increased significantly under Diefenbaker, Mulroney and now Harper. We need lots of immigration. The head of my Conservative ridding association is not white and from a 3rd world country and he gets hit with your kind of comments all the time … the funniest is: when canvassing with a woman he asked why the the household ( white Liberal establishment) was against the Conservatives; the answer was ..”because you are against non-whites and women”. He said “what are we?”
Cynapse you Liberals have had it pretty easy painting us as bigots. But the new media is not going to let you get away with it much longer.
I’ve never belonged to any party nor voted consistently for any party. Keep that in mind when tossing those labels about.
You seem like a decent fellow, but your voice and the voices of people like you aren’t strong enough in your party. What can change that will be time. Give it 20 years and some of the nasty bits of the CPC will die off (btw, this is exactly what was said in the National Post podcast re: this Gay pride brouhaha). You’ll have several generations of conservatives used to living with human rights of all kinds and the focus will move to other issues. When those rights issues disappear you’ve have access to a large family-oriented Chinese popluation, a large capitalistic Indian population, etc.
Truth be told, your future is bright.
I’ll stop when you stop tossing labels out about Conservatives that are plain wrong Cynapse.
Name one. You will be buried in URL’s, guaranteed.
Don’t make this ugly – please consider another strategy, sir.
“Truth be told, your future is bright.”
Absolutely Cynapse, that is what MP Wajid Khan ( a neat fellow, former Pakistani fighter pilot) said to a group of Muslims in Flemington Park … “you are Conservative and don’t know it”.
He went on to explain that when he crossed the floor from the Liberals to Conservative he had realized that entrepreneurs were held in high regard in the Conservative Party and that the “get up and go” that had brought these new immigrants here in the first place (versus the 3rd generation lazy establishment “married to x’s daughter”) meant they had qualities the country needed. That Conservatives were not going to treat them as hyphenated immigrants but as Canadians.
here’s a label that is untrue:
“By the time you get the CPC ready for Toronto consumption, the Albertan overlords of the party will probably be lobbying to have you kicked out. Don’t you see that you’ve been given a bit of a mission impossible here? You’re trying to sell a party that build its base covertly and overtly on Toronto-hate and small-l liberal hate. Anti-immigration platforms …”
People like Nom sway Canadians away from the ballet box, particularly voting for the right and thats why I predict another minority government. The only question is, will it be the left leaning Conservatives or the left leaning Liberals with their republican leader from the states?
I guess its Iggy’s to lose.
“Say what you mean – nativist.”
No I don’t, I mean what I said, pro-Canadian. Immigration laws are enacted by the Canadian government for one purpose and one purpose only, to protect Canada and Canadians. Sheez, of course immigration laws are against immigrants. Who else could they possibly apply to. That’s like complaining because the Criminal Code is just against criminals.
I will say this in defense of immigrants. I believe that their objection to almost any pro-Canadian immigration law is based on misinformation or a lack of information. I dealt with immigrants quite a bit for a number of years, the vast majority of crime victims in these communities suffer at the hands of people of their own ethnicty. Sure these same thugs victimize Canadians in general but they are especially attracted to their ‘own’. Immigrants are generally no different in their wants and needs than anybody else. When they do fully understand an issue, surprisingly their sense of right and wrong rarely differ from any other Canadian. Therein lies the problem. Any attempt by the CPC from acting in Canada’s and Canadians best interests by enhancing Canada’s ability to weed out the foreign criminal element, the unsavory or just unqualified foreigners from coming here is automatically and very aggressively portrayed as anti-immigrant and/or racist by the opposition politicians and disgruntled misfits within their own communities. The Liberals have been so derelict in their duties in regards this issue and for so long that immigrating to Canada has morphed from a priviledge into a right.
“”People like Nom sway Canadians away from the ballet box”
UV
Would you mind telling us specifically what you disagree with?
As to what Cynapse has say to your rambling responses.
UV just try, you can do it. What do YOU disagree with?
You can do it Nom, figure it out as you seem to be a bright guy. If not, ask Cynapse who has to explain so much else to you.
No no UV, not today, you are not off the hook that easy.
You cannot respond with a disagreement between Cynapse and me because we pretty much agree, he just thinks I’m wasting my time in the CPC.
But UV, you have no arguments, you just complain. You are as bad as those 3rd generation lazy Torontonians that Cynapse described; which is not why “people don’t go to the ballot box”. But it is why a lot of good people don’t run for politics because they don’t want to waste their time rebutting strawmen positions that have become the norm these days.