Mark Steyn on the HRC’s Ottawa Oct 2010

Now that the Canadian ‘Human Rights Commissions’ have seen fit to once again award an outrageous and infuriating judgment to a prisoner who arbitrarily shot a policeman, for no reason whatsoever other than he wanted to shoot a policeman, for having to stand up in prison for roll call I thought it was time to say a few more words about the CHRC’s. Below, an email to CFRA CC’d to me, and below that, part of Mark Steyn’s on the HRC case against Ezra Levant, made public today by the kind permission of The Centre For Policy Studies.

The Human Rights commissions are clearly more than just a corrupt shakedown as Ezra Levant proves so clearly in his book of the same name. It is a political institution, who’s purpose is to inflame and make helpless the rational sensibilities of ‘conservative’ (Read non Marxist) Canadians.

If you look at past judgments, they clearly seek to find the most outrageous judgments to award. Once is a misunderstanding. Twice is policy.

Check the award to a transsexual who was refused service by a plastic surgeon as he did not have genuine from the factory female parts. He was awarded a great deal of money from a doctor, and the doctors reputation was smeared.

This was no accident.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

6 Replies to “Mark Steyn on the HRC’s Ottawa Oct 2010”

  1. C.H.R.C.. Over here it’s known as the E.H.R.C.. Just as lethal and just as corrupt. It obviously has a common source, but who?

  2. In the 1950s and 60s things were pretty good in the Western world and even parts of the Eastern one. Economies were booming and everyone more or less got along. There wasn’t much in the way of real danger but people, ever vigilant after WWII, needed to try and make sure that nothing like the Holocaust happened again, as well as needed an outlet for that all too under-rated human need for meaningful conflict.

    Jewish and leftist groups (back then, leftist groups resembled what the media now refers to as ‘far right’ today) decided that there should be some mechanism to deal with speech that, they imagined, could lead to more Nazi like hatred, as if stopping a tin foil hat wearing nutbag in Toronto like Ernst Zundel with a giant expensive bureaucracy would do anything other than turn him into an international celebrity.

    So I suppose in this instance, one can blame the Jews or at least, Jewish organizations who influenced a guilt ridden Canadian government which had sent back at least one ship full of German refugees with the famous quote: “There are two kinds of people Canada does not need. Communists and Jews”.

    I must say I certainly half agree with that prime minister.

  3. His thesis that multiculturalism is just a means of destroying diversity is spot-on. This is why multiculturalist dogma will continue to lose its authority; it is not individualistic, nor does it protect diversity in any form.

  4. Eeyore you are right about the left back in the 60s, what most people don’t know is that back then the Democrats and Republicans were both controlled by liberals. The far left Marxists took control of the Democrats in the early 1970s and things started to change.

    Steyn is a real good man, he knows the truth and tells it the way it is, although I don’t think Obama will drive us back to being English subjects again. And he is right about multiculturalism, it does destroy diversity not increase it, all it was designed to do was help the left take over the west. What we have to remember is that the short term danger is from the Moslems, the long term threat is from the far left.

  5. They will not stop unless you use the tactics of the Muslims. Fear and money is the only thing the left anywhere understands.

  6. oldguy what we have to do is to start using the lefts tactics against them, we have to sue when they violate our rights, we have to force them to defend their positions and we have to get out and vote.