Sunday, January 20, 2008

David Warren Disses Fascist HRC

Article here. It's a good read. This guy's good. Emphasis mine.

That's why you go to an HRC: because your case is not good enough to stand up in a legitimate court of law. And because you don't want to invest your own time and money, but would rather the taxpayer provide officers to do the paperwork, and pick up the tab. Instead, you want a slam-dunk way in which you can victimize someone you don't like, by playing the victim yourself, without any financial or legal consequences, except to him. "Human rights" commissions were designed to provide just this service, for the use of persons who are both litigious, and lazy.


I think those with the means (Maclean's magazine, for instance) should now be applying to proper courts of law in Canada, to obtain injunctions against harassing "human rights" suits, brought with the purpose of abridging freedom of the press. And other media in Canada, whether or not already under attack themselves, should be giving continuous front-page coverage to this issue, in which freedom of the press is itself at stake.

For there is something even more seriously wrong in Canada, than HRCs, when these appalling cases are getting more attention abroad than here at home.

That last paragraph ought to make the little hairs on the back of everyone's neck stand up. I believe that the fact that the mainstream media refuses to cover what's happening with the so-called "human rights" commissions in which peoples' rights are literally violated, is indicative of possible conspiracy between those "human rights" fascist inquisitors and the press.

And that it very, very frightening. What is the press, then, if not a de-facto Department of Propaganda of the de-facto Leftist-controlled state apparatus of which I frequently write? Is the press the de-facto propaganda arm of the Far Left, which we know has infiltrated and acquired a vise-like grip upon the levers of bureaucratic and front-line execution, enabling Leftwing extremists to operate things as they see fit, independently of the actual, elected, legitimate government in Parliament? We have, after all, read the reports of rogue bureaucrats, departments, agencies, etc., arrogantly disobeying the orders of the duly, legitimately elected and accountable Government of Canada. Most recently we heard of the problem with AECL, coldly, uncaringly acting against the urgent, emergency interest of the People and the demands of the Government, forcing Parliament to unanimously pass emergency legislation to restart the Chalk River reactor so that medical isotopes could continue to be produced for most of the world's nuclear-medicine diagnostic testing. That's but one example of how the Leftist state apparatus can effectively run things their own specially-preferred way despite what the laws say, despite what the Constitution Act and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms explicitly say or, in the case of them brainlessly, doggedly following the rules no matter what, which appears to have been the case with the AECL, despite what the government requests or orders them to do in an emergency situation in which lives are literally at stake.

Oh, and I'm also reminded of judicial activism, which we know to be every bit as wrong as what the so-called "human rights" commissions do with respect to violating peoples' rights. Judicial activism is, of course, a violation of the right to a fair trial and a crime against the Canadian People, depriving them of an unbiased, scrupulous judiciary which they can trust.

Nodes of the state apparatus are clearly marching far too much to their own drummers. They're effectively roguely, mutinously, running a state within a state, ignoring the real, legitimate government and the Canadian People, pushing whatever they please against our wishes.

If Canadians cannot trust the state apparatus, then what?

Now, back to the press...

When peoples' rights are violated, it's usually treated by the press as newsworthy. Like, for example, when militant homosexuals and radical, supremacist Islamists go to the HRCs and allege "discrimination" or "offence" or "hurt feelings", the press covers the kangaroo court cases' results, which are in favor of the complainants 100% of the time. But in the case of Ezra Levant, the MSM is eerily silent.

The press is far too silent. Much like the elusive "moderate Muslims" of the world who we're waiting to hear from a whole lot more than we are now.

Is the press free? Or is it controlled by the Far Left?