Fox News North can't launch because regulation against lying in the news won't be repealed

[notyoueither]

No, I was pulled over and had my car pulled apart to search for drugs, leaving the contents of the car on the side of the trans-canada highway. Total 4 hour ordeal, 2 hours of which was me intricately packing all my stuff back in (I was moving, it was VERY full).

They thought I was a drug mule of some kind.

I would consider that far worse than going down to a station and talking to the police about Ben.

So, the police were wrong and your treatment was shabby, so everybody should face similar unjust impositions, is that it?

[notyoueither]

I'd point out, Asher, that many of your postings on this site could well end up with you being 'interviewed' on your time and your dime by HRCs. Some of the things you have to say about religion and religious people are quite outrageous.

[Wezil]

Why would anyone reports some cartoons to a human rights council anyway?

The better question - Why does government have speech tribunals in the first place?

[Wezil]

I'm actually kind of thinking that HRCs should be forbidden from taking on any case based on expression.

If there is some illegality, it should be left to public prosecutors and higher standards.

Bingo!

The tribunals are a forum for crybabies that don't have a legal leg to stand on.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Man that is screwed up. Talk about chilling effects to free speech.

[Wezil]

Yep. The Tribunals are a harassment and intimidation technique.

The truth is not a defence. How sad is that?

[Asher]

I'd point out, Asher, that many of your postings on this site could well end up with you being 'interviewed' on your time and your dime by HRCs. Some of the things you have to say about religion and religious people are quite outrageous.

It doesn't cost me anything to be interviewed. I'm not stupid enough to pay $100,000 in legal fees for an interview where, if it goes to tribunal, the maximum fine is a tiny, tiny fraction of that cost.

[Asher]

So, the police were wrong and your treatment was shabby, so everybody should face similar unjust impositions, is that it?

My point was there's far bigger fish to fry than the commissions/tribunals. It's a waste of breath to even talk about it. It's really only used against immense douchebags in any case, which makes it even less of a pressing issue.

On the other hand, the OPP abused their powers. I made a complaint which was never responded to or followed up with. It was ignored. I consider this a far bigger problem than Ezra Levant's, where he was given an opportunity to rant and grandstand in a video on YouTube and then whine about the opportunity for years on end.

The more he whines about it, the more I'm tempted to open up HRC complaints on a regular basis targeting him. I think he deserves it.

[Asher]

The better question - Why does government have speech tribunals in the first place?

I agree that it should be treated as a criminal matter infront of the courts. Ezra should have a criminal record.

These tribunals are flawed only in that they are toothless. Another reason the immense amount of whining about them is ridiculous.

[Wezil]

They're flawed because they allow for bull**** decisions.

I've had a client indirectly ****ed over by a tribunal decision (a lower court judge relied on a non-binding CHRT decision). Don't tell me whining about them is ridiculous. They have to go.

[Asher]

They're flawed because they allow for bull**** decisions.

I've had a client indirectly ****ed over by a tribunal decision (a lower court judge relied on a non-binding CHRT decision). Don't tell me whining about them is ridiculous. They have to go.

If the judge is relying on a non-binding CHRT decision, that's a problem with the judge or the rules the judge followed. The HRT decisions are non-binding and are not criminal. Whining about them is a bit ridiculous. People get speeding tickets that cost more than HRT decisions.

[Asher]

I can think of far more dangerous examples of government overstepping its bounds. Like how Ontario confiscates your car on the spot when they allege you speed. You are guilty until proven innocent.

That should engender far more rage than a due-process system with commissions with non-binding decisions.

[Asher]

Ontario is also trying to fine my SO $200 for applying for the "HST tax credit" when he was not eligible because he didn't live in Ontario.

The problem is on the forms, he clearly applied for the "GST/HST Tax Credit" while residing in Alberta, with all the forms indicating Alberta.

Ontario STILL WILL NOT ADMIT they are wrong.

Ontario is far more of a problem to me than the HRC/HRT ever will be. Legislating grocery stores to charge me $0.05 per bag that goes directly into the store's profits. Confiscation of your car for speeding without a trial. Taxing me for owning a car every year on top of registration fees. Unreasonable searches.

[Wezil]

Yes, it was a problem with the judge and it was eventually overturned on appeal at great expense to my client. Unfortunately these tribunal decisions are legally persuasive and some judges are relying on them. The solution is to remove the quasi-judicial system that is generating these decisions in the first place. They are bad law and bad precedent.

[Asher]

Yes, it was a problem with the judge and it was eventually overturned on appeal at great expense to my client. Unfortunately these tribunal decisions are legally persuasive and some judges are relying on them. The solution is to remove the quasi-judicial system that is generating these decisions in the first place. They are bad law and bad precedent.

I don't object to removing them. I object to Ezra Levant's hysteria and histrionics.