Barrel Strength

These are excerpts from the Canadian Human Rights Commission Annual Report of 2007

Warman v. Wilkinson 2007 CHRT 27

In a decision rendered on July 10, 2007, the Tribunal upheld the complaint filed by Mr. Warman against Mr. Wilkinson but dismissed the complaint against the Canadian Nazi Party. The Tribunal found that Mr. Wilkinson communicated messages through a website that were likely to expose individuals to hatred and/or contempt on the basis of religion, sexual orientation, race, colour, national or ethnic origin, or disability. Read the rest…

Jennifer Lynch, QC, Chairman of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, writes as follows in the 2007 Annual Report of the Commission.

“In addition to its role in processing complaints, the Commission has represented the public interest by intervening in hate case hearings before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT). To date, the Tribunal has issued more than 15 decisions in complaints against Canadians connected to hate websites or materials. In all instances the Tribunal has ruled against the respondents and ordered them to close down their websites and pay damages - sending a powerful message of social solidarity to all those targeted by hatred and contempt.

“As effective as section 13 has been, the Commission recognizes that complaints are only one tool of many that must be used to combat hatred in Canadian society. The Commission is continuing to work with civil society organizations and governments towards developing a comprehensive strategy to combat hatred in all its aspects.”

All of which demonstrates that, once the law has created a category of crime, and set up an agency to deal with it, it must seek a broader mandate, because the crime problem is so much vaster than was previously imagined. Parkinson’s Laws are universal. Work expands to fill the time allowed it.

Notes from the HRC Tribunal Hearing of Warman vs. Lemire

Background

The hearing in Ottawa on Tuesday was the last in a five week-long process concerning a prosecution of Marc Lemire under section 13.1 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, titled Richard Warman, complainant, and CHRC versus Lemire, respondent. Most of the hearings had occurred in 2007.

The Human Rights Commission had previously sought to exclude its staff from being questioned about their investigative techniques, or to be identified at all, on the grounds that they would be subject to real and substantial risk. The presiding judge of the Human Rights Tribunal, Athanasios Hadjis, had previously ruled that these employees might be questioned, but without third parties present. The respondent Marc Lemire had also gone to the Federal Court to compel the production of evidence, which the Human Rights Commission subsequently allowed him to have. The fact that the Commission was seeking in court to prevent the disclosure of information that it had already given to Marc Lemire weighed heavily in Judge Hadjis’ revoking his own decision.

Judge Hadjis changed his mind, rescinded his previous order, and allowed questioning to go ahead. This resulted in the proceedings of Tuesday March 26^th in Ottawa.

Read the rest…

Sometimes I feel my contributions to this blog are nothing but a commentary on the National Post. On the other hand, most of the relevant debate is occurring in its pages, and not elsewhere.

 Yesterday a frequent letter writer to the Post, Mindy Alter, asked the relevant question of the Canadian Jewish Congress in relation to the hate speech provisions of the various Human Rights Acts of Canada and its provinces:

“In other words, it often feels better to do something rather than nothing, even if, in the long run, that something — for example, establishing yourself as the cheerleader for Canada’s thought cops — ends up making the situation much worse. One wonders if the CJC will be able to shake off the effects of this debilitating syndrome before it’s too late.”

Well, today the CJC reveals that it will not be able to. Read the rest…

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks/

Peter Foster asks in today’s Financial Post:

“To put it in a nutshell, why is valid economic theory so counter-intuitive to the human mind? Also, why do liberals feel the need to get on such a moral high horse in their condemnation of economic truths?”

Answer to the first question: Envy. And a wise concern for not being cheated.
Answer to the second question: Moral superiority is its own reward.

My point is that liberal market societies have emerged from certain historical processes, late in time, and could be lost for millennia if certain conditions are not satisfied.

Read the rest…

Joe Bageant is an entertaining leftie ranter who wrote Deer Hunting With Jesus, and who writes from his new home in Johnson’s Village, Belize, where he says he tries to live on $5,000 a year. By the way, per capita GDP in Belize is $7,800 a year (2007) so I think he doth protest too much.

 His article on inevitable population growth spurred me to a rejoinder. Read the rest…

Short shrift is given to youngsters in Asian culture and that is one of the factors which has inhibited the development there in all spheres, including scientific, cultural and economic. That is why one sees leaders of China and India, who would feel more comfortable in a nursing home than the world stage. But here is a meme to watch.

Read the rest…

Sometimes it seems like every bad idea of the 1970s refuses to die but lumbers forward as one of the Great Big Stupid Unkillable Ideas. It seems that some mistakes are so large, so widely held, so deeply believed, that their absurdity must be worked out tragically, in wasted lives and economic and spiritual devastation. The Big Stupid Unkillable Idea of the 1970s under discussion today is Identity Politics. The Wikipedia article shows that a) it was an idea from the 1970s and b) it is of leftist origin. Read the rest…

It’s rising two years since that June day Canadians awoke to the thrilling news that a dozen and a half men, mostly ‘youths’, had been apprehended trying to blow up downtown Toronto - and went back to sleep. Well, publications bans will dilute even the strongest stimulant and the story was appearing to be less than cask potency anyway. There was more than a little evidence that the junior jihadis had been heavily stage-managed. Paid informants? Really? Really well-paid informants? Really well-paid informants who seemed to know the plotters’ plots even before they did? Really well-paid informants who had to be hastily deterred from sharing their thoughts and memories with the press? Paintball? Camping trips? Fertilizer in agri-business quantities?

This shapes to be one of those excruciatingly embarrassing made-in-Canada productions, complete with stilted scripts, plots that creak and groan, barely competent acting and production, and credits that attach an endless list of government agencies to the failure. One of those amateurish, thoroughly unwatchable shows that are the inevitable result of a system that has lost its way? We shall see. Perhaps more instructive is the fact that the left is more or less invisible on this one. Invisible in the same way that feminists have abandoned their Muslim sisters - nothing to be gained, energy to be lost and distraction from the ultimate goal of conquest of the west? Or is it a matter of timing? Perhaps the activistas are simply waiting for a bigger stage.

Either way, it is truly surprising that a place as self-regarding as Toronto (and I regarded myself there for a dozen years quite as much as any) should simply forget the Toronto 18 for weeks and months at a time. After all, had their machinations succeeded, cross-town traffic would have been snarled for days! At any rate, it is safe to assume years and perhaps many years will pass before anything is in any way resolved. This is a country that cannot prevent illegal immigrants from entering the country, find them once they jump bail or, should they be unlucky or inept enough to be caught, actually deport them. What conceivable chance does this system have against Canadian-born or naturalized citizens with rights, relatives and rapidly growing communities?

Given the handicaps under which they work, it may be miraculous if law enforcement, intelligence and justice agencies come out of this with dignity and credibility, let alone victories. In the meantime, don’t bother to stay tuned for more news of the Toronto 18. There won’t be much and it won’t be good.

In the Village Voice, bless them, or whatever the atheistic version of that encomium might be.

Everyone is having fun pointing out how few media reports pin the guy as a Democrat.  Is it because they feel it isn’t necessary?  Anyway, as I posted on my new love, Twitter, ‘Guys like Spitzer always make their wives stand up there with them. “Honey, are you free later? We have an event downtown. Dress nice.”‘

Plus, if Spitzer is going to stand up there with a woman, what about the one that cost all that money? She’s the one I want to see.

I sent a letter to Margaret Wente of the Globe and Mail. This was the article in question. An exposition at the Royal Ontario Museum on Darwin could not find corporate sponsorship. Wente concluded that new scientific findings on the biological bases of sex, race and character difference were as offensive to liberal dogmas as evolution is to the creationists.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinions/columnists/Margaret+Wente.html

Dear Mrs Wente:

Your article on Darwin in this Saturday’s Globe was well taken.  The implications of modern research for notions of equality, race, intelligence, character and crime are extremely challenging for those who have believed that only the structures of society prevent the achievement of equality, and engender racism/sexism/nationalism.

Read the rest…

We all learn from MSM that Bush voters are knuckle draggers and that Kerry voters are, well oh so sophisticated. What is the reality? Read the rest…

I have spent the last four or five weeks on the wild frontier of Web 2.0 or Web 3.0 or pick a number - the Web of social media and limitless interaction. My bookmarks file is full of things like Twitter and Eyejot and Utterz and drop.io. To sum it up, it looks like every communications device everywhere will be able to link up instantly with every other device. A glimpse of what that means so far? OK, the other night on Twitter, a young California millionaire named Jason Calacanis posted a message saying, ‘join me for a chat’. He is an interesting man, so sure, OK, I clicked on the URL. He was videocasting live from his car - the camera, presumably in a cell phone - was wedged in the cup holder. When I somewhat tentatively sent him a text message asking him to drive carefully, he glanced down, laughed and said, ‘no problem, traffic is slow right now’ and carried on replying to other text questions on his screen. I have been watching a lot of live video streamed to the Internet from cell phones lately - this was the first from the driver of a car. While it is difficult to see the practical applications of this right away, except to lawyers, doctors and insurance underwriters, maybe it will prove a boon to humanity. How the hell would I know? As an oldie, all I do is broadcast TV from my desktop at http://live.yahoo.com. So 1999.