I sure hope the sockpuppets at the CHRC kept really good notes and, well, logs of their internet use. That way they’ll be able to prove that it was some other Jadewarr who was using Nelly Hechme’s wireless connection.
Written by jay on April 28th, 2008 with
8 comments.
Read more articles on free speech.
Read the comments left by other users below, or:
Four Horses
#2.
April 28th, 2008, at 6:57 AM.
“What kills a skunk is the publicity it gives itself.”
~ Abraham Lincoln
The LS from SK
#3.
April 28th, 2008, at 8:18 AM.
Well Four Horses,
That Skunk stinks to high heaven but what smells even worse is the non-reaction of Harper, Nicholson, Baird and others including the RCMP to this daily embarresment.
If they have nothing to hide (including political links, trade offs and favours of Lynch (a Liberal) and Hall to embedded bureaucrats) then this should have resulted in a Judicial Eguiry/Investigation a long time ago.
Dr.Dawg
#4.
April 28th, 2008, at 8:36 PM.
dcardno:
I’ve seen this popping up elsewhere too: the CHRC says they did nothing wrong: but YOU know, for a fact, that they committed a criminal act; therefore, the CHRC is claiming that a criminal act is nothing of the kind.
No, they are not. They are saying that their staff did not commit the crime.
Now, get this straight: there is NO proof, NONE whatever, that CHRC was involved in any of this. We are taking Lemire at his word about the time of the Jadewarr posting–everything else, including the Bell log information, flowed from that.
Can timestamps be altered, or not? The certainly can be on Blogger.
Four Horses
#5.
April 28th, 2008, at 9:02 PM.
Well, LS, are we now seeing that “hidden agenda”, we have heard so much about ?
The government is not sitting idly by - they are proactive in the Lemire railroad case with their representative from Nicholson’s office helping the CHRC to try and hide the unsavory dealings.
Give me all the stories and excuses they want, that this was a continuation of Cotler’s good-bye gift - I don’t buy it. I don’t think many do.
One would have to be blind and illiterate not to take notice of the unlawfulness and injustices done to date. Either that, or there is an “agenda” …….
.
DCardno
#6.
April 29th, 2008, at 1:10 AM.
Dawg:
I thought that it was established that a “Jadewarr” posting was made from the IP assigned to Ms Hechme’s computer, irrespective of the timestamp provided by Lemire, whether it can be falsified or not. If that is the case, then an identity controlled by CHRC staff made a posting on someone else’s internet connection - the assertion that they did nothing wrong remains a jaw-dropper. If it is not the case, and the attribution of the posing to Ms Hechme’s IP address depends on the timestamp provided by Lemire (if it is possible to manipulate it, or if can inadvertently be wrong) then you are correct, and the CHRC’s postion becomes understandable.
jay
#7.
April 29th, 2008, at 2:07 AM.
As a matter of speculation I would be very surprised if the higher ups at the CHRC knew very much about what the kids in Hate Crimes investigations were doing. And, I suspect, that as they begin digging they are going to be more than a little unhappy at the shenanigans they uncover.
However, it has gone well beyond the point where an internal investigation will suffice.
It is time for a full judicial inquiry into the activities of the s. 13 unit of the CHRC. With a judge, professional investigators, real lawyers and real transcipts.
Kathy Shaidle
#8.
April 29th, 2008, at 4:15 AM.
I love it when Dawg bravely calls bullshit on stuff.
This is the same man who tried, unsuccessfully, to get the blogosphere and the mainstream media interested in a completely bogus, long-ago debunked “Indian mass graves” story last week.
His judgment is not what I’d call awe inspiring.
If you want to leave your comment on this article, simply fill out the next form:
You can use these XHTML tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> .
Stay current with Jay Currie on these personalized pages:
#1. April 28th, 2008, at 6:52 AM.
What’s really interesting is her contention that the connection was secured. It could be that her router was secured with WEP (which apparently is about as secure as a cereal-box decoder ring) - but even that indicates a more-than-trivial effort to find a fresh IP on Jadewarr’s part. If it was properly secured then I don’t know what to make of it - although how the CHRC counsel can claim that they have done nothing untoward, nothing wrong in theft of service remains a bit of a jaw-dropper.