For instance in Alberta the provincial HRC says it is fine to sing or chant “Kill the Christians” – as Christians are considered part of the oppressor class, but Rev Boissoin was fined, ordered to apologize and barred for life from preaching the gospel’s tenets on homosexuality for writing a letter to the editor that criticized the Gay lifestyle.

Give it time, an Orthodox Rabbi will be charged in similar fashion soon.

As I mentioned earliar B’Nai Brith has had it’s own Weapon of Mass Censorship Destruction, Canada’s vile thought crime law Section 13 (1) turned against them by Islamists, a preferred victim class of Canada’s HRCs.

B’nai Brith have belatedly determined that they do not enjoy being subjected to abuse of process, such as the non-disclosure of evidence held against them, the denial of the right under natural law to face their accuser etc etc etc.

And yet foolishly they still hope they contain this fools golem they have unleashed. They want the law tweaked not abandoned in the vain hope it will remain their playtoy.

They can’t disable that organization fast enough for my tastes. I read recently that even Steven Harper is noticing he’s got a monster on his hands.

First, how could the CHRC get involved in the case if no-one filed a complaint with them?

Second, even if someone did file a complaint with the CHRC it would probably be out of the their purview anyway. This is a criminal case, not a civil case involving disrimination or speech that supposedly incites discrimination.

(In fact, one of the biggest problems with the CHRC is that a criminal defendent or a defendent in a normal civil suit has more procedural protections than someone facing the CHRC/CHRT. But that’s another story.)

Third, it simply isn’t true that the CHRC has ignored anti-Semitism. I suspect that the bulk of the speech cases brought at the federal level have involved anti-Semitism because the bulk of the cases have all been brought by Richard Warman.

Richard Warman is a former investigator at the CHRC who has now become its biggest complainant. He’s made it his personal crusade to shut down white supremicist web sites that publish anti-Semitic material, like the Freedom Site run by Mark Lemire. Warman even received an award from the Canadian Jewish Congress for his efforts to shut down these basement losers. Why Warman obsesses on white supremecists while ignoring the Jew-hatred published by radical Muslims is a mystery.

But if I were to speculate about the mindset held by Warman and the whole CHRC crowd, I’d say it’s a mixture of: (a) fighting the last war — they’re so obsessed with neo-Nazis that they don’t see the far greater threat posed by Muslims like Ibragimov, and (b) Political Correctness run amok — persecuting immigrant Muslims is uncool, so they’re conveniently ignored.

Second, the concept of “hate crimes” is one of those vague leftist terms that winds up being applied to anyone with whom they disagree. It is a very slippery slope. Note, for example, that ads in student newspapers opposing reparations for blacks have been considered such crimes. In Canada a minister is enjoined from reading whatever he likes from the Bible in public because he chose to read the verses against homosexuality.

One of the reasons I voted for McCain was that the sort of people Obama associates with politically tend to believe in criminalizing speech they don’t like. On university campuses, where the left has power, the left has become the chief opponent of free speech in the country and I don’t think they’d mind extending their power to the rest of us.

I finally figured out some years back that the authoritarianism in leftist ideology is not an anomaly, it’s inherent in the system.

As to requiring national service from junior high up, that’s another post.

Mark Steyn commented that the one time (before his and Levant’s show trials) that the CHRC dismissed a case was that against the Canadian Nazi Party. It was on a technicality. They found that they had brought a case against an organization that did not exist.

Forget the “hate crimes” aspect. Just throw the book at somebody who commits the crime, whatever it is: arson, assault, etc. Don’t try to guess what’s in his mind, hang him for his actions. But hang him high.

Just an FYI, the CHRC does not have jurisdiction over criminal matters, they operate in the civil realm. Canada does have hate crime laws on it’s books.

As an alleged Human Rights Commission the CHRC is charged with policing thought crimes under Section 13 (1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

If you offend the wrong party or are otherwise considered a political enemy you may easily find yourself hauled before the CHRC under Section 13(1) as the CHRC and it’s provincial counterparts have proven to be susceptible to both infiltration & corruption by activist NGO’s and other even less desirable elements.

Sad to say but organizations such as the Canadian Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith Canada were instrumental in the development and implementation of Section 13(1). A move that has backfired on B’nai Brith who have been fighting for several years now, a complaint lodged against them by Islamists in the province of Manitoba under that provinces Section 13(1) equivalent.

It would ONLY have been a hate crime if a Jew had defended him/herself and killed the guy…