• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

More Fun With the CHRC

NoZed Avenger

Penultimate Amazing
N
Joined
Apr 19, 2002
Messages
11,286
The CHRC (Canadian Human Rights Commission) is back in the news.


I have posted a few things in the past on what appeared to be a dangerous trend for the CHRC being used as a weapon to silence opinions. There were a number of controversial prosecutions for opinion pieces which raised a lot of questions on the scope or the agency's authority and governing rules. It was also problematic that one man, an ex-investigator, had brought an overwhelming percentage of the complaints before the Commission.

Recently, there was a thread on a recent decision by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal which appeared to end and perhaps reverse the trend towards potential censorship (by holding Section 13 prosecutions invalid under the Canadian constitution), which was an extremely welcome development. It appeared sanity was winning out.

Now *this* development is just plain weird:

http://ezralevant.com/2009/09/chrc-investigates-richard-warm.html

Richard Warman, the hate speech complainant who is personally responsible for all but two section 13 censorship prosecutions this decade, is now being investigated by the Canadian Human Rights Commission for hate speech himself.

* * *

Warman is a former CHRC investigator himself; and even after he left the CHRC they continued to pay his expenses to file and prosecute complaint after complaint. All this, despite the fact he's been under investigation for hate speech for three years.

At the same time as Warman was a complainant, he was a defendant.

At the same time as the CHRC was cutting him cheques to cover his expenses, they were probing his conduct.

At the same time as he held himself out to be an anti-hate crimes activist, his own hateful speech was being probed.
Click to expand...


Um. Yet another trademarked WTH?!! moment.
 
I'd take what Ezra Levant says with a grain of salt. As far as I'm concerned, he's to Canadian politics what Ken Ham is to biology.
 
Madalch said:
I'd take what Ezra Levant says with a grain of salt. As far as I'm concerned, he's to Canadian politics what Ken Ham is to biology.
Click to expand...

Except he links to a filing at the CHRC - which shows what looks like a 12/06 commencement date. Since that time, Warman brought a *number* of complaints before the board and was paid for his expenses by the Commission. While they were investigating him.

The opinion stuff you can throw out, but the fact that Warman -- who was a past member and who can easily be confirmed as "the" human rights plaintiff at the CHRC (multiple complaints filed in that three year period) -- is being investigated and may face the same type of charges he has himself brought seems uncontrovertable. It also seems trivial to confirm he was bringing a large number of his actions (as the complaining party) and being reimbursed at the same time. And that the potential prosecution by the CHRC is going on *after* Section 13 has been declared unconstitutional.

Take any position you want on what is right or wrong about any of the positions being offered -- that has still got to be considered a major WTH?! moment, doesn't it?
 
Madalch said:
I'd take what Ezra Levant says with a grain of salt. As far as I'm concerned, he's to Canadian politics what Ken Ham is to biology.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you with respect to Ezra Levant and I think I will wait until it reaches the mainstream press (or the National Post) until I make a judgment. ;)
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
I tend to agree with you with respect to Ezra Levant and I think I will wait until it reaches the mainstream press (or the National Post) until I make a judgment. ;)
Click to expand...
So you think Ezra Levant hacked the CHRC web site to make it appear that Warman was being investigated?
 
NoZed Avenger said:
Except he links to a filing at the CHRC - which shows what looks like a 12/06 commencement date. Since that time, Warman brought a *number* of complaints before the board and was paid for his expenses by the Commission. While they were investigating him.

The opinion stuff you can throw out, but the fact that Warman -- who was a past member and who can easily be confirmed as "the" human rights plaintiff at the CHRC (multiple complaints filed in that three year period) -- is being investigated and may face the same type of charges he has himself brought seems uncontrovertable. It also seems trivial to confirm he was bringing a large number of his actions (as the complaining party) and being reimbursed at the same time. And that the potential prosecution by the CHRC is going on *after* Section 13 has been declared unconstitutional.

Take any position you want on what is right or wrong about any of the positions being offered -- that has still got to be considered a major WTH?! moment, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Mark Steyn has a section on his blog dedicated to his fight with the CHRC. He deals with this in his latest post.
 
gtc said:
Mark Steyn has a section on his blog dedicated to his fight with the CHRC. He deals with this in his latest post.
Click to expand...

But if Ezra Levant is the equivalent of Ken Ham, then Mark Steyn is "Dr." Hovind. I don't care what claims either of them make.
 
Madalch said:
But if Ezra Levant is the equivalent of Ken Ham, then Mark Steyn is "Dr." Hovind. I don't care what claims either of them make.
Click to expand...

The only claim that appears important is that Warman is under investigation using the same law he himself used as a cudgel against opinions he disagreed with -- when he was the one 'plaintiff' that brought almost all of the prior complaints before the Commission and profited off the cases. That appears to be backed by the scan of the Commission's own ruling.

I don't see where the identities of Levant or Steyn enter into it at all.

Can you explain why we have to take their word for anything mentioned? What precisely do you believe is going on -- Levant forged the scan of a publicly-filed document which could be located and retrieved by an interested reporter? He and Steyn have infiltrated the HRC and replaced the real officials using robot duplicates? What precisely is being disputed about the story, because I don't see where who they are matters to the facts about the investigation being made, as opposed to any opinions they hold about Warman personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom