Alright, here we go.
First off, Bronwyn Eyre writes for the Star Phoenix: Affordable access to justice critical:
And even if you manage to scrape together the money to hire a lawyer, your problems aren’t always solved, as my friend’s case shows.
To get results, you need really deep pockets for top-of-the-line representation. It’s no accident, for example, that once Maclean’s magazine hired a top QC to argue its case against the Canadian Human Rights Commission last year, secret hearings came to an end and notorious Section 13(i) of the Canadian Human Rights Act was declared unconstitutional.
Second, Reporters’ Without Borders’ recently rather poor rating of Canada’s press freedom receives a little more coverage from Jesse Ferreras, Paws and Reflect, Five Feet Of Fury ( with a response from Sister Sage’s Musings ), Halls of Macadamia, and Free Dominion ( with more here ). Meanwhile, Xtra mag’s latest article on the HRCs – Feds consider striking hate speech clause – is noted by Blazing Cat Fur and BigCityLib, while Barry Cooper’s latest article on the HRCs – Human rights commission takes things too far – receives commentary from Patrick Ross at The Nexus of Assholery: The Hard Decision on Human Rights Commissions.
Third, a little round-up from Free Dominion: Feds consider striking hate speech clause; Free Speech under attack by the Canadian Human Rights “; and Human rights commission takes things too far. Meanwhile: FD Defence Fund – Target $1,130:
We are no strangers to adversity. Free Dominion, its members and internet peers have all come under fire from government sanctioned attacks on what we say and the way we say it. It boggles the mind to think that anyone should maintain that we should craft our written and oral expressions to avoid offending anyone.
It is plain frightening that the people who decide what is offensive are those who write or phone a human rights commission with a complaint. The bar for what constitutes politically correct speech is several levels under the subway tracks.
Connie and Mark have to defend themselves against the various lawfare suits filed to try to shut them down. Defence costs mount and we need to ensure that the Free Dominion site remains open and active in our fight against the tyrants who want to limit our constitutional freedoms. Limiting our freedom of expression is just a start – our freedoms of belief, association and religion are next but not necessarily in that order.
The lawfare tactic is transparent; those who engage in government sanctioned censorship do not want to be exposed for who and what they are, so they hire lawyers to hide behind and trust that their targets will go broke. So far, thanks to you, our members, they have failed.
We are once more appealing to you to help with the defence fund. Our target is to raise another $2,500. Thank you in advance for your generosity.
Fourth, it looks like Ezra Levant won’t be going to Washington after all. From Ezra’s blog:
TUESDAY UPDATE: Unfortunately, I have to cancel my appearance at this conference. I highly recommend your own attendance, though — it has a stellar line-up of speakers, and I know some great Canadians will be there, too. I will still attend my other fall events, including those in Montreal tomorrow and Thursday.
Read it here. Kathy Shaidle will be attending, however. Meanwhile, also from Ezra’s blog, some housekeeping: Transcript of appearance before Parliament’s Justice Committee:
I learn via Mark Steyn’s website that the transcript of our testimony before Parliament’s Justice Committee is now online. You can read the whole thing here. I’ve already posted videos of the hearing, which you can see here, but it’s useful to read the transcript too. (I’m delighted that the YouTube clips have each been viewed up to 10,000 times.)
I had a good meeting tonight at the Beth Israel/Beth Aaron synagogue. After my speech and the Q&A, I stuck around for almost an hour with a dozen of the most engaged attendees. They’re genuinely concerned about Montreal reaching a critical mass in terms of Islamic radicalism.
Tomorrow I’m speaking at a Fraser Institute reception and dinner, for which there still might be a few tickets left. Details here.
Finally, for those who missed my blog update yesterday, I regret to report that I must cancel my visit to Washington next week, which I do with a heavy heart.
Read it here.
Fifth, Scaramouche writes:
A clear-cut case of “racism” and “discrimination,” no? The kind of hate that the Canadian Human Right Commission has made it its business to root out of the heart of each and every Canadian. Well, no. According to an academic (Allah bless those academics), just because an imam loathes, reviles and abominates infidels and uses the Arabic equivalent of the “n” word to describe them (the same word that’s getting To Kill a Mockingbird turfed off local school curricula), it doesn’t mean he actually wants anyone to go out and, you know, kill people:
Professor Amir Hussain, who teaches theology at Loyola Marymount College in Los Angeles, but grew up in Toronto, said he does not read the word “destroy” in a literal way.“For me, I don’t see the remarks ‘destroy them from within themselves’ as hoping for violence. Rather, I see it as him asking that the group implode from within. Granted, implode and destroy are of course violent metaphors, but I liken it to him asking for the organization to disintegrate.”Yeah, it was one of those “internal implosion” things–as opposed to the kind of external explosions that those who hate the kuffar and plot to blow them up in, say, malls or skyscrapers or airliners are so fond of.Come home, Professor Hussain. The Canadian Human Rights Commission (or the Ontario Human Rights Commission, or one our land’s many other “human rights” outfits) always has an opening on its roster of Commissars for people who think exactly like you.
Read it all here.
Sixth, Dick Field writes for the Canada Free Press: The Human Rights Crowd – Power & Money before Principle:
When I came down the gangplank of the troopship in Halifax in November 1945, I was a proud 21-year old Canadian army veteran. If someone had told me then that my very own governments would take a wrecking ball and destroy almost all I fought for, I would never have dropped my weapons.
I rushed home and innocently returned to school; went to university, got married and contributed to the baby boomer generation. I trusted my governments. I foolishly believed they understood the fundamental principles that underpinned our laws and would never allow such principles to be breeched. I didn’t reckon with the wreckers; Prime Ministers Pearson and Trudeau and their acolytes.
The Human Rights Act of Canada is passed – Another swing of the Wrecking Ball
Now real trouble began. The politicians were bombarded with visible minority complains of racism, job exclusion, schooling by teachers that didn’t look like them and curricula that they claimed they could not relate to because they said it was too “Eurocentric.”
Cities began to set up race relations committees, placing ethnics in charge because it was disgracefully assumed that only non-white faces or certain other ethnic or “disadvantaged” individuals or groups could possibly understand the hurtful nature of racist actions or even racist remarks. Their agenda was to tell the “European” population how to speak and behave towards themselves.
Minority activists now saw that race relation committees could not enforce their mandate. They saw them as waste of time and money. So the cry of these activists became, we need “teeth” to enforce (the iron fist) Human Right’s Codes of the Federal and Provincial governments.
The Liberals agreed and thinking that they could placate their new vote-rich minority supporters and relieve themselves of any direct responsibility for breaking the laws of the land, they established Human Rights Commissions and their lawless tribunals all across Canada and ultimately every province followed suit.
The politicians deceptively washed their hands of any responsibility for the operations of these nightmare illegal tribunals by claiming they operated at arms length. They should hang their heads in shame. In a democracy, no government body can be immune to the direction of the people’s government. Here’s what our leaders agreed to:
The Human Rights tribunals are permitted to bring their victims to their kangaroo courts and charge them with any act directed by a majority person against a designated minority person. It can be the “crime” of hurting the minority person’s feelings. The accused does not have the right to be presumed innocence; no right to face his accuser and no rules of evidence protect him (heresy is admissible). His records if any are subject to seizure without warrant.