We still don't know what is going on with the investigation, do we?

I've been stuck in Kafkaville for six years. Welcome, Mark! Nice to have company.

re: #1 hermeneutics

There is no "investigation." That's part of the problem. It's not a court. It's a Kangaroo Farce...a travesty...a Star Chamber. (I've been following the developments through National Post articles...)

Is there a list of "human rights" somewhere or do they just make it up as they go along?

Perhaps it would be quicker just to wall me up with the buried "Justice" mural.

Don't give them any ideas, Mark.

Tourists were shut off from the B.C. legislature’s rotunda this week as work began to hide four historical murals behind walls.

Meanwhile- while Canada goes after Mr. Steyn and artwork- the real threats to Canada and western civilization are continuing to plot our demise while laughing their asses off at the PC idiots.

re: #3 J.S.

Thanks JS -- Are all their deliberations open to public scrutiny -- is there a transcript?

sorry for the way early OT: but....

U.S.: No objections to Abbas-Hamas dialogue.

Sure why shouldn't the organization that the U.S. has been playing against Hamas (or that is what they told us as they gave the PLO billions of dollars, armored cars, training, guns, land, etc.), talk, reconsile and merge with a(nother) Terrorists group?

I hope buzzsawmonkey posts his throughts on human rights v. civil rights and how the former is inimical to the latter.

We're with you, Mark.

‘Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.”

He couldn't have said that. Dean Steacy, you couldn't have said that.

re: #11 song_and_dance_man

*head spins wildly*

It snowed two inches last night in Angel Fire, NM. Now it's sleeting. Birds are huddling near their nests trying to keep the chicks from hypothermia. Even range animals are laying down.

Global warming? Its JUNE.

re: #11 song_and_dance_man

I'm just glad he acknowledged that the Bill of Rights is an American document, given to the world by the Greatest Nation on Earth.

(it is so often assumed to be a "World" document that has always been inherent to human existence)

I've just read the whole thing at both links.

This Canadian Human Rights Commission is extremely reminiscent of the "secret trials" of the old Soviet Union. Which Canada seems to resemble more and more these days.

Down in the dark cave of the proglodytes.

some facts from the linked article:

-In 1999, a Christian printer was fined $5,000 for refusing to print a series of pro-pedophilia essays. He spent $40,000 in legal fees trying to defend himself.

-In 2005, the Knights of Columbus of Port Coquitlam, B.C., were fined for refusing to rent their hall for a lesbian wedding

In its 31 years of existence, not a single complaint brought before it [the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal] has been dismissed. That's right: Everyone is guilty before God and the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

but the money quote?

‘Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.” —Canadian “Human Rights” Investigator Dean Steacy, responding to the question “What value do you give freedom of speech when you investigate?”

In Vancouver?

No surprize there, Moonbat country, even for Canada.

Does Steyn sometimes feel out of sorts with the human rights supporting media in Canada?

Over the last year I've shaken the hands of both Mark Steyn and Barack Obama.

Let me tell you: I value the Steyn handshake much more.

The CHRC Poem

[Link: www.cruxy.com...]

full of funny examples of actual cases,
for example:
Are your new genitalia out of position?
Call the Canadian Human Rights Commission

re: #18 shibumi "but the money quote?
‘Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.” —Canadian “Human Rights” Investigator Dean Steacy, responding to the question “What value do you give freedom of speech when you investigate?”

Spot on post.

Don't the Canadian courts have any rights to review the decisions of the Canadian Human Rights Commission? How could they have such an [im]perfect record?

Canada is in deep Kefka indeed if it doesn't do something about it's mutlicultural fetish.

re: #11 song_and_dance_man

He's right, freedom of speech as we know it is an American concept. Yet another item on that huge list of reasons why I love this country.

Canadian HRC, un HRC- not really about human rights, is it?

re: #26 madisonsfriend

Canadian HRC, un HRC- not really about human rights, is it?

No- it's not about "human rights"- it's about furthering a progressive agenda.

Are there any Canadian LGFer's who can answer my question about Canadian Courts posed in my #23?

If Obama becomes President with a Democrat majority in both Houses and an aging Supreme Court, we'll all be living in Kafkaville soon.

the Canadian government demonstrates to the world how badly they’ve gone off the rails.

It demonstrates that CANADA has gone off the rails but it's somewhat wrong to blame the government, generally or a specific one. The distinction is important because the process evolved, egged along by the commissions themselves and judges. This could happen anywhere in the free world, including the USA. There's plenty of craziness there too.

One hopes that the current government is re-elected with a majority and kills these commissions dead.

re: #23 realwest

Don't the Canadian courts have any rights to review the decisions of the Canadian Human Rights Commission?

I recall from previous threads that there is no appeal process through "real" Canadian courts. The Human Rights Commission is a separate entity.

Somebody was ''live blogging" from there yesterday.
Anyone have a link?
I really have got to start bookmarking stuff I want to revisit.

re: #30 Ringo the Gringo

Obama: a liberal-"progressive" candidate...

Canada: a liberal-"progressive" Country.

you do the math!

re: #30 Ringo the Gringo

If Obama becomes President with a Democrat majority in both Houses and an aging Supreme Court, we'll all be living in Kafkaville soon.

I was kinda hoping for Margaritaville myself.

it is being live-blogged, although the guy on scene just ran low on power and is searching for an outlet

re: #7 hermeneutics

These "Tribunals" are typically called "informal" (yeah, that's right) -- "informal!" -- that means no transcripts...nothing written down. Ezra Levant (when he was called before an Alberta "human rights" commission), knew this and went prepared. He went (along with his lawyer) and filmed the whole thing. (It was an inquiry to determine whether or not to go to further proceedings -- it was like an Inquisition -- it's been posted at his website -- ezralevant.com -- and at YouTube.) I had a list of all the violations of legal norms which these commissions routinely engage in..(it's quite lengthy -- I have the list on another computer..) Anyway, a few years back a retiring president of the Canadian Bar Association gave a farewell address -- and in that address he warned about "the future of Tribunals in Canada" -- these tribunals fall under what's known as "Administrative Law" -- and I find it problematic to say the least -- no appeal, no written judgements, no formal procedures, etc., etc. (The irony here is that the accused "rights" are grossly and disgustingly violated in multiple ways by these "Human rights" commissions..)

Ah.
Found it.
Macleans.

[Link: blog.macleans.ca...]

Really good.

re: #32 Killgore Trout

I recall from previous threads that there is no appeal process through "real" Canadian courts. The Human Rights Commission is a separate entity.

That gives unlimited power to the HRC.

re: #33 mean Gene

Somebody was ''live blogging" from there yesterday.
Anyone have a link?
I really have got to start bookmarking stuff I want to revisit.

Try this:

[Link: blog.macleans.ca...]

re: #9 MandyManners

I hope buzzsawmonkey posts his throughts on human rights v. civil rights and how the former is inimical to the latter.

Oh, but I've said it so many times.

"Human rights" are a UN construct. They are high-sounding words which, in practice, mean nothing. Most regimes which actually violate anything that can be recognized as a basic "human right" are actually regimes which do not protect individual liberty--i.e., most of the UN member states themselves.

Individual liberty is safeguarded by the protection and enforcement of civil rights under an impartial rule of law. Without civil rights under an impartial rule of law, there is no individual liberty--and there certainly are no "human rights."

"Human rights" are applied to groups, not individuals--and for that reason alone should always be viewed as suspect. When the "human rights" concept is applied in a nation that does protect civil rights, it is always in the service of a group seeking special rights over and above what they are allowed under the law.

"Human rights" began to be introduced into domestic American political discourse after the Civil Rights Movement had won its civil rights victories, and the Marxists, separatists and Islamists who began taking the movement away from King--and were succeeding even before his death--began looking for set-asides, special treatment, and thumbs on the scale because the civil rights the movement initially demanded were not enough for them.

But where "human rights" really got going was with the "gay rights movement." There was no precedent in American law for shoehorning sexual preference into civil rights law, so gay rights activists began speaking of "human rights" as if they were talking about civil rights, just as the Global Warming advocates are now sliding their language into "climate change." That they began this changeover in the 1970s, when the black civil rights movement was still a vivid memory, and were able to build upon the "human rights" ground prepared by those who had co-opted the civil rights movement, made this switch easier.

The Islamist movement, which adopted the term "Islamophobia" from the "homophobia" of the gay rights movement, has also adopted the language of "human rights" as it increasingly demands public accommodation for Islam over and above the equal rights Muslims already enjoy under civil rights law.

. As Canada awoke one morning from uneasy dreams it found itself being gnawed upon in its bed by a monstrous Socialist dung beetle.

And my Canadian wife will continue to insist that Canada's government is superior to ours in all ways. Canada has a much lower crime rate than the U.S., has socialized medicine, lives in peace, and is beloved by all nations of the world... Blah, blah, blah.

here's the live blog link
[Link: blog.macleans.ca...]

Ezra Levant live blogged the first couple of days
he didn't mince words:

Khurrum Awan is a serial liar
By Ezra Levant on June 3, 2008 2:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | Trackback
Julian Porter himself was at the meeting where Khurrum Awan and his junior Al Sharptons tried to shake down Ken Whyte and Maclean's for cash and a cover story.

Porter asked Awan point blank if the CIC's proposed "counter-article" was to be "mutually acceptable" to Whyte or of the CIC's own choosing.

After obfuscating for a few rounds, Awan acknowledged that he never in fact offered a "mutually acceptable" article -- that was simply an after-the-fact lie, a little bit of taqqiya that Awan et al. has told the press.

Awan admitted that he made no such offer of a mutually acceptable author. It was to be the CIC's own choice.

[Link: ezralevant.com...]

re: #45 song_and_dance_man

Rush is their finest export.

And here I thought it was Lord Stanley's Cup.

/Good thing it's on this side of the river, eh. :-)

Hey!...What's this all aboot?.......aye?

Political correctness trumps all...the truth is usually it`s first victim!

re: #23 realwest

As others have noted -- there can be no appeals. (In a real court of law in Canada -- civil or criminal -- yes, of course, you can appeal. But not with Human Rights Commissions...again, HRC's fall under Administrative Law.) Also means that the BC HRC could dictate to the magazine what to print.

re: #21 zombie

Over the last year I've shaken the hands of both Mark Steyn and Barack Obama.

Let me tell you: I value the Steyn handshake much more.

What value do you give to Obama's umm anything?

United Nations experts are also applying their global tests to Virginia, USA--a backwater failing the UN Standard for human rights.

It's Kafkaville on George Washington's Potomac River!

U.N. official to visit Prince William to study [aggressive crackdown on]illegal-immigration policy

[Link: www.examiner.com...]

re: #31 greenmamba

It demonstrates that CANADA has gone off the rails but it's somewhat wrong to blame the government, generally or a specific one. The distinction is important because the process evolved, egged along by the commissions themselves and judges. This could happen anywhere in the free world, including the USA. There's plenty of craziness there too.

One hopes that the current government is re-elected with a majority and kills these commissions dead.

The difference I think is that in the US such kangaroo courts have no real judicial power.

For example, I myself attended one of the extra-judicial kangaroo courts: the Berkeley Police Review Commission, which held a hearing after the February 12 Marines protest. I wanted to see if my videos and photos were going to be used at the hearing, since I had far and away the best record of the police behavior concerning the incident in question (the arrest of a teenager). I shouldn't have been surprised, but not only was my material not referred to, but the only people allowed to give "evidence" was World Can't Wait and Code Pink, who showed a laughably fraudulent mini-documentary they created just for this one "trial" attempting to show "police brutality" using hilarious edits and jumps in their film, and interspersing scenes from other days and other cities. It was beyond ridiculous. But the police who were being accused were not even given the chance to respond. Nor was there any "advocate" for the other side -- onlhy the complainants were allowed to speak. I had to really restrain myself from jumping up and yelling, "I was there! Everything you just saw was a pack of lies and distortions!" (Whcih I luckily didn't do.)

But in the end the "Commission" agreed that there was horrible police brutality that day, but they had no power to pass any judgment. It was not a cirminal trial -- just a kangaroo court. The best they could do was pass a recommendation to the police chief that the officers involved be fired. Which the chief promptly threw in the trash.

The whole exercise was just a way for the lefties to get their jollies bashing the police. If the Commission had attempted to enforce its finding, it would be (successfully) challenged as an extra-judicial system and thus unconstitutional.

Thank god I live in America.

re: #41 buzzsawmonkey

Oh, but I've said it so many times.

"Human rights" are a UN construct. They are high-sounding words which, in practice, mean nothing. Most regimes which actually violate anything that can be recognized as a basic "human right" are actually regimes which do not protect individual liberty--i.e., most of the UN member states themselves.

Individual liberty is safeguarded by the protection and enforcement of civil rights under an impartial rule of law. Without civil rights under an impartial rule of law, there is no individual liberty--and there certainly are no "human rights."

"Human rights" are applied to groups, not individuals--and for that reason alone should always be viewed as suspect. When the "human rights" concept is applied in a nation that does protect civil rights, it is always in the service of a group seeking special rights over and above what they are allowed under the law.

"Human rights" began to be introduced into domestic American political discourse after the Civil Rights Movement had won its civil rights victories, and the Marxists, separatists and Islamists who began taking the movement away from King--and were succeeding even before his death--began looking for set-asides, special treatment, and thumbs on the scale because the civil rights the movement initially demanded were not enough for them.

But where "human rights" really got going was with the "gay rights movement." There was no precedent in American law for shoehorning sexual preference into civil rights law, so gay rights activists began speaking of "human rights" as if they were talking about civil rights, just as the Global Warming advocates are now sliding their language into "climate change." That they began this changeover in the 1970s, when the black civil rights movement was still a vivid memory, and were able to build upon the "human rights" ground prepared by those who had co-opted the civil rights movement, made this switch easier.

The Islamist movement, which adopted the term "Islamophobia" from the "homophobia" of the gay rights movement, has also adopted the language of "human rights" as it increasingly demands public accommodation for Islam over and above the equal rights Muslims already enjoy under civil rights law.

That's like a shot of vitamin B! Thanks!

re: #51 alegrias

United Nations experts are also applying their global tests to Virginia, USA--a backwater failing the UN Standard for human rights.

It's Kafkaville on George Washington's Potomac River!

U.N. official to visit Prince William to study [aggressive crackdown on]illegal-immigration policy

[Link:

re: #23 realwest

Don't the Canadian courts have any rights to review the decisions of the Canadian Human Rights Commission? How could they have such an [im]perfect record?

I think the average defendant doesn't have the money to appeal, but the live-bloggers seem to be hoping Macleans loses this, and they will take it to the Supreme Court if they lose.

But the sock puppets and their lawyer are doing such an incredibly bad job, we're afraid Macleans will win, the BCHRT will find a face-saving way to back down...

but you never know

re: #41 buzzsawmonkey

You meanie! What about my hurtie-feelings?

re: #51 alegrias

United Nations experts are also applying their global tests to Virginia, USA--a backwater failing the UN Standard for human rights.

It's Kafkaville on George Washington's Potomac River!

U.N. official to visit Prince William to study [aggressive crackdown on]illegal-immigration policy

[Link:

For every Jihadi we turn into paste on the battlefield, another one works in a group like the HRC

/spit

re: #52 zombie

But in the end the "Commission" agreed that there was horrible police brutality that day, but they had no power to pass any judgment. It was not a cirminal trial -- just a kangaroo court.

This might sound strange but, perhaps the kangaroo court does some good in that it lets the moonbats think they've actually accomplished something.

re: #54 MandyManners

Meh. The [sane] residents of the Commonwealth won't sit still for that kind of shenanigans. No suh, they will not. (Sigh, too bad NOVA is going to hell in a handbasket, 'cause I miss Virginia.)

re: #54 MandyManners

* * *
They're one and the same organic mulch compost rotted manure!

re: #30 Ringo the Gringo

If Obama becomes President with a Democrat majority in both Houses and an aging Supreme Court, we'll all be living in Kafkaville soon.

I hope that Charles builds a "nuclear option" into this blog. Just in case. A registered user can opt out of lgf and have all of his posts deleted while the "speech police" bang outside his/her door.

/ tin-foil hat halfway perched on head

re: #41 buzzsawmonkey

Nekama's Troll Hammer

Human Rights BuzzSaw(monkey)

Let me get this straight....

They have a seperate Court to discuss seperate laws?

What exactly is wrong with the actual Court and the actual Laws?

re: #30 Ringo the Gringo

If Obama becomes President with a Democrat majority in both Houses and an aging Supreme Court, we'll all be living in Kafkaville soon.

I'm clinging to the hope that if Urkel gets elected, he'll be so busy doing what the polls tell him to do (a la Bill Clinton) that the government will essentially be on autopilot.

re: #59 MandyManners

This might sound strange but, perhaps the kangaroo court does some good in that it lets the moonbats think they've actually accomplished something.

Interesting point. So much of leftist agitation is about "achieving moral victories" and "sending a message" that giving them a playroom and some toys might keep them out from underfoot of the grownups.

re: #64 WrathofG-d

Let me get this straight....

They have a seperate Court to discuss seperate laws?

What exactly is wrong with the actual Court and the actual Laws?

* * *
Your Canadian Laws are Not Sharia enuff!

re: #64 WrathofG-d

Let me get this straight....

They have a seperate Court to discuss seperate laws?

What exactly is wrong with the actual Court and the actual Laws?

White man's court based on the rule of law versus Lib court and feelings

It should also be noted that the Human Rights Commission is not run by anyone from a legal background and the "expert witnesses" are some minor intellectuals at best.
I would simply not show up at their kangaroo courts. If the Human Rights Commission wants me, it can drag me out of my home, Soviet-style. They pander to that sort of theme. Let's see if they have the guts to actually act.

re: #59 MandyManners

Good point. For a lot of those people, intent and symbolism are everything.

South Park had it right
Bush should invade Canada !
At least it would slow down the Islamafication of the Country

/you know what goes here

re: #67 alegrias

Your Canadian Laws are Not Sharia enuff!

Communism: Share and share alike.

Islam: Sharia and sharia-like.

re: #64 WrathofG-d

Let me get this straight....

They have a separate Court to discuss separate laws?

What exactly is wrong with the actual Court and the actual Laws?

It's for mind crimes.

The worst part is the Human Rights Commission is designed to destroy human rights.

Hi Mark,

From the U.S. Senate debate on Global Warming and Carbon Credits.

notwithstanding the real deal out side

[Link: www.arapahoebasin.com...]

ya, Snow Cone's still,

[Link: water.usgs.gov...]

Snow melt just could flood the Senate Chamber before they see the truth.

Mad House World of Loon Liberal Lies.

re: #23 realwest

Another point though -- although technically there can be no appeals through the HRC (their decisions are final). There is a way to get their decision into a real court of law. And this is what Ezra and Steyn hope for --lose the HRC case, then take it to a real court (it's very expensive though -- again, this avenue is open if you lose your case at the HRC and you've got a lot of resources -- financial and legal to go to a real court of law...)

It just so happens that my member of parliament is the Justice Minister and I have e-mailed him telling him that he should introfuce legislation to abolish these star chambers which have no legal status but nevertheless can impose fines and punishments unbelievable as that may sound. Furthermore the so-called commissioers - or perhaps that should be commisars - have no legal backgrounds but are recycled lefty 'activists' sucking at the public teat with nary a real job or accomplishment in their resumes.
Actually rumour has it that McLean's magazine wants to lose the star chamber performance so that they can take the commissioners to court in a real court.
BTW not one of the complainants is from British Columbia (this is a provincial tribunal). The main complainant is one Mohammed ElMasry an anti-semitic sicko, and as far as I can see from public reaction to this whole charade far from racking up any sympathy for Muslims in Canada it is having just the opposite effect. Muslims in Canada to date have contributed little positive but they are very active in crime and sedition. A cost benefit analysis of Islamic immigration everywhere in the western world would reveal a whopping great deficit. What a bunch of destructive creepy losers.

re: #75 pat

The worst part is the Human Rights Commission is designed to destroy human rights.

Individual rights, for sure.

re: #74 debutaunt

It's for mind crimes.

We be committin' those mind crimes together...
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin John Lennon

re: #66 buzzsawmonkey

Interesting point. So much of leftist agitation is about "achieving moral victories" and "sending a message" that giving them a playroom and some toys might keep them out from underfoot of the grownups.

* * *
John Conyers has held "mock" impeachments in Congress.

Mrs. Conyers was at the Democrat super-delegate meeting which decided Florida and Michigan voters were worth 1/2 of other voters.

It's not a game to them. They are serious, and to Hades with unintended consequences to real people.

Mugabe plays the same game & it results in mass deaths.

The United States is very far down this road. Both the Kelo abomination and McCain -Feingold give unprecedented powers to unelected Boards and Commissions, frequently populated by the corrupt or the doctinaire.

re: #49 J.S.

As others have noted -- there can be no appeals. (In a real court of law in Canada -- civil or criminal -- yes, of course, you can appeal. But not with Human Rights Commissions...again, HRC's fall under Administrative Law.) Also means that the BC HRC could dictate to the magazine what to print.

How....progressive.

re: #72 buzzsawmonkey

Communism: Share and share alike.

Islam: Sharia and sharia-like.

* * *
Me No Likey~!

re: #80 buzzsawmonkey

We be committin' those mind crimes together...
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin John Lennon

I loved it when Levant was told that he could think whatever he wanted.

re: #55 FriarsTale

Ezra (on his website) has explained how he's going to get his case into a real court of law.

re: #85 song_and_dance_man

The 9th Circuit is offendedoffensive.

re: #64 WrathofG-d

Let me get this straight....

They have a seperate Court to discuss seperate laws?

What exactly is wrong with the actual Court and the actual Laws?

Somebody had to make work for the countless thousands of social workers, ethnic-studies majors, third-rate attorneys, and other professional meddlers pumped out by the Information Society's institutions of learning. I mean, these enlightened, sensitive people can't exactly Speak Truth to Power and Make the World a Better Place working for private-sector firms, producing goods and services that people actually need and use. What better than to give them an extralegal Star Chamber where they can symbolically avenge themselves against Dad, the locker-room bullies, and any other private demons that may be tormenting their fragile little psyches?

OT:

Barak Obama Gets Another Endorsement: George Galloway

Truck Bearing 1,300 Liters of Sulfuric Acid Stopped at One of The Gaza "checkpoints" the UN, US, etc., are insisting Israel remove.
~Sure Israelis might die, but we have Arab conveinence to worry about.

Reform Jews To Lose UN Status for "insulting" UN Human Right Commission.
~"We don't want to hear about how Hamas desires to commit a genocide against the Jewish people, and destroy Israel, we are talking about the cruelty and viciousness of the IDF now. If you cannot just shut up about WHY the IDF is in Gaza, we will ban you from the UN for good." -UN

re: #66 buzzsawmonkey

Interesting point. So much of leftist agitation is about "achieving moral victories" and "sending a message" that giving them a playroom and some toys might keep them out from underfoot of the grownups.

They get to preen and prance while the police chief and others get to snicker and roll their eyes.

re: #70 mikalm

Good point. For a lot of those people, intent and symbolism are everything.

Sounds like BHO and his empty suit.

re: #40 reine.de.tout

Try this:

[Link: blog.macleans.ca...]

Try ezralevant.com (but he may not be there today)

re: #29 song_and_dance_man

Free speech is what it is even if we don't like what's being said. It is up to us who also have free speech to point out the nonsense of others who use it for nefarious reasons.

In the political sense, the freedom of speech exists to permit criticism of the government.

But in the generic sense, freedom of speech exists ONLY to protect unpopular, offensive, or controversial speech.

Its no trick to let people say or print things that everyone likes or agrees with. No special protection is necessary there. The freedom exists specificall to let people say things that are controversial.

So in fact, the oft asserted "right not to be offended" is entirely incompatible with freedom of speech (which could be correctly construed as the right to be OFFENSIVE).

The Feng Shui of Islamic Scatology

re: #81 alegrias

* * *
John Conyers has held "mock" impeachments in Congress.

Mrs. Conyers was at the Democrat super-delegate meeting which decided Florida and Michigan voters were worth 1/2 of other voters.

It's not a game to them. They are serious, and to Hades with unintended consequences to real people.

Mugabe plays the same game & it results in mass deaths.

I can't speak for Buzzsawmonkey but, I was talking about ineffectual losers.

re: #52 zombie

Zombie, was Osha Neumann at that meeting? He's one of the mainstays of Berkeley leftist shysterism, and is heavily involved in the PRC. Google his name -- the man is a laughable walking stereotype of Sixties moonbattery.

Thanks to The Anchoress:

"The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog.” - GK Chesterton (broadcast talk 6-11-35)

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences.” –C.S. Lewis

re: #89 mikalm

Somebody had to make work for the countless thousands of social workers, ethnic-studies majors, third-rate attorneys, and other professional meddlers pumped out by the Information Society's institutions of learning. I mean, these enlightened, sensitive people can't exactly Speak Truth to Power and Make the World a Better Place working for private-sector firms, producing goods and services that people actually need and use. What better than to give them an extralegal Star Chamber where they can symbolically avenge themselves against Dad, the locker-room bullies, and any other private demons that may be tormenting their fragile little psyches?

Spot on!

re: #52 zombie

Good story and fair comment; I still worry about the US though. It IS the planet's only guarantor of freedom and it's looking shaky. You DID have Jimmy C as president (scariest fact on earth) and thus sanity is not guaranteed.

re: #90 WrathofG-d

And here I was having such a relaxing day and you've gone and made my blood boil.

I cannot wait for the day when I can buy a condo in the future "former" UN building.

re: #98 jill e

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences.” –C.S. Lewis

Nothing to add. Just wanted to see it again.

re: #59 MandyManners

This might sound strange but, perhaps the kangaroo court does some good in that it lets the moonbats think they've actually accomplished something.

Bingo. That's what it's all about. Satisfying the moonbats' urge for a public grievance theater in which the grown-ups must pay attention to their whining. After the little exercise in Primate Scream Therapy, we've all gotten it out of our system and we can go home and finally relax.

re: #52 zombie

thanks for the report, have you written that up for Zombietime?

re: #88 LindaMarie

The 9th Circus is Offensive.

re: #103 zombie

Bingo. That's what it's all about. Satisfying the moonbats' urge for a public grievance theater in which the grown-ups must pay attention to their whining. After the little exercise in Primate Scream Therapy, we've all gotten it out of our system and we can go home and finally relax.

Do they dress as badly in the hearings as they do on the streets? Do they smell?

One thing that concerns me is the cost to the tax-payers. Is it worth it to pacify them? Do the hearings serve as a safety-valve?

re: #105 jcm

The 9th Circus is Offensive.

There's a new, conservative chief justice.

re: #101 Creeping Eruption

Its amazing. It also oddly parrallels an old story about Anti-Semitism I remember being told throughout my childhood about the Harvard Board. I've mentioned it many times before here on LGF, but in short it goes as follows: The Dean is complaining about all the cheating and dishonesty of the Jewish students, claiming that it shows an inherennt dishonesty in Jews, etc., and thus they should all be kicked out of Harvard. Another board member states that all students in one way or another are dishonest and cheat. The Dean screams back, No! We are discussing the Jews!

No reason to move the U.N., its just about time to start using our money power against it.

re: #97 mikalm

Zombie, was