The vote was virtually unanimous, complete with standing ovation.

iii) The Conservative Party supports legislation to remove authority from the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal to regulate, receive, investigate or adjudicate complaints related to Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Most importantly, the resolution was supported by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.
Thanks to everyone out there who took the time to contact your local newspapers, delegates, and MP’s. It’s not the end of the battle by a long shot, but it’s a very positive step forward.
(Previous).

Modify HRC Jurisdiction
PROPOSED BY VICTORIA AND KELOWNA – LAKE COUNTRY
iii) The Conservative Party supports legislation to remove authority from the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal to regulate, receive, investigate or adjudicate complaints related to Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Passed “overwhelmingly”
Previous.
From Gord Tulk who’s on the scene at the convention, “kady omalley’s posts over at macleans are full of errors. The vote on fiscal imbalance did not see one hundred people rush into the room. All policy sessions finished early many of the resolutions passing like sh?t through a goose. Only ten resolutions from each of four catagories make it to the plenary. If more than ten were passed the delegates vote by paper ballot which ten get to the floor. Debates were vigourous but not heated – we are all consevatives here. It’s like SDA comments in real life. Having a blast. “
Speaking of Macleans, comment of the day here – “It’s like Kady’s sitting in South Korea trying to figure out what’s happening in the North by looking over with a pair of binoculars.”

In the past few hours, a joint effort by a number of bloggers has resulted in a flyer that Conservative delegates will be receiving in time for this weekend’s policy convention in Montreal (correction – Winnipeg!).
(You can view and download a copy of the flyer here.)

While the hour is late, consider contacting your local Conservative MP to let them know you too, support the resolution which reads as follows:

Modify HRC Jurisdiction
PROPOSED BY VICTORIA AND KELOWNA – LAKE COUNTRY
iii) The Conservative Party supports legislation to remove authority from the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal to regulate, receive, investigate or adjudicate complaints related to Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

(Click graphic for details.)
For my part, I’m focusing efforts on winning in the highly-coveted Best Feminist Blog category. It’s the same thing, really.

Binks;

During the event, Professor John Miller of Ryerson slagged Mark Steyn as a mere ‘polemicist’ and not a responsible journalist. As an example, he used Mark’s quoting of Ayatollah Khomeini from (he said) the now infamous Macleans article. Looks like he’s been trusting the citations of the SockPuppets, because as Steyn himself notes, it’s actually from the Maclean’s article ‘Celebrate tolerance, or you’re dead‘.
Miller asserted that after a thorough Internet search, he found the Khomeini quote only in one comment on one [echh, ptui] blog.
Meanwhile, Ezra was surfing online, and interrupted a minute later to point out he’d just then Googled 100+ references to the quote in question, including one from the eminently liberal Harper’s Magazine, 1985. Public pantsing accomplished.
The point isn’t the fact that Ezra scored a point, but that the new media mindset is different. “Fact? Fact-check. Don’t take old media or other political speech as taken for granted. Dig around; check the sources.” In leading up to this presentation– for which Dr. Miller and others presumably had week and weeks to prepare, why didn’t a journalism professor know how to Google and fact-check on the internet?

(Because everything he knows about journalism, he lurned by reading the New York Times.)
Lots more freespeechy goodness today there and at FFoF, where, if you search the fine print, you’ll discover she has a new book out.

Kill The Christian.
You are the one we despise
Day in day out your words compromise lies
I will love watching you die
Soon it will be and by your own demise
Buried in hypocrisy
Lacerate your faith in God
Morally diseased
On the cross of Calvary your body bashed defeated stabbed
Blessing as you hate
Loyal to your enemies
Monetary faith
As him you will pay for the lies of your prophecy
Satan wants you dead
Kill the Christian, kill the Christian
Kill the Christian, kill the Christian
Kill the Christian, kill the Christian, kill the Christian
Armies of darkness unite
Destroy their temples and churches with fire
Where in this world will you hide
Sentenced to death, the anointment of Christ
In due time your path leads to me
Put you out of your misery
The death of prediction
Kill the Christian
Kill the Christian, dead!
Feel free to republish this at will, because, as we all know, no Christian has ever been attacked, killed, or prosecuted on the basis of their faith.
h/t

“… they have added another day to September.”

Like that was likely to work.

“I am a Canadian,
a free Canadian,
free to speak without fear,
free to worship God in my own way,
free to stand for what I think right,
free to oppose what I believe wrong,
free to choose those who shall govern my country.
This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold
for myself and for all mankind.”
Flea – “He never added the caveat, ‘so long as nobody might be offended'”.
Join the election day blogburst!

Their Marsupial Majesties at the British Columbia “Human Rights” Tribunal have dismissed El-Mo’s complaint against Maclean’s and voted unanimously to acquit the hatemongers.

Andrew Coyne – “Aw nuts, we won.”
Related!

Will B’nai Brith offices be raided and computers seized?

Will their hard drives be forwarded on the CHRC and the complainant? Will their emails be hacked and portions posted on the net?

Indeed. An embarrassing Globe and Mail piece in which the readers know more about the topic than the writer.
Update – BCF tries to keep up with the G&M comments dance. Perhaps someone threatened to sue?

Was the Canadian Muslim community suckered by the CHRC?

Stageleft comments on Joesph Brean’s article on the HRC’s definition of their purview.

There are a lot of unpopular thoughts out there folks, a lot of narrow mindedness, a lot of bigotry, and a lot of racism, and it needs to be confronted head-on using facts, reality, mockery, and ridicule – not by authoritarian commissions that are already allowing themselves to be willingly misused telling us what we can and cannot say, and decided what is, or is not, in or out of bounds.

Cheers,
lance

I hope this leads to actual reform, though I’ll miss the redirected CPC donations.
Related – Backing themselves into a closet, the CHRC moves closing arguments on the Lemire case to a smaller venue. Like that’s going to save them.

Complete this form, and without even breaking a sweat, you’ll have communicated or caused to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, a matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

Or, join the team at CHRC, and get paid for it!
h/t

Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
August 10, 2008
Dear Mr. Lemire:
This letter is to report the results of our investigation of your Privacy Act complaint against the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC). You stated in a letter received in our office on July 8, 2008, that the CHRC failed to grant you access to personal information you sought to obtain under the Act.
Our investigation confirmed that the CHRC received your request for access to your personal information on April 18, 2008. … On May 15, 2008, the CHRC refused you access to the requested information …
… The investigation confirmed that the transcribed transcripts of this hearing was under the control of the CHRC at the time of your request and, as such, the CHRC was required to process it and provide you with your personal information where it exists, subject to exemptions.
Under the circumstances, I am of the view that your complaint that the CHRC denied you access to personal information is well-founded and the CHRC has been so informed….
Section 41 of the Privacy Act provides a right to apply to the Federal Court of Canada for review of the decision of a government institution to refuse to provide access to personal information. (goes on to describe the Federal Court Appeal process, etc)
Yours sincerely,
(signed)
Joyce McLean
Acting Director General
Investigations and Inquiries Branch

BCF explains;

This is the same trial transcript the Canadian Human Rights Commission claimed didn’t exist but then “doctored” and shopped around to journalists in an attempt to cover their lies.