Comments on: Was Harvey Goldberg of the CHRC under oath?

By: john begley

john begley — Mon, 19 May 2008 15:15:36 +0000

if the mounties are visiting the site it’s probably in aid of seeing how badly they themselves have been compromised(as witting or unwitting co-conspirators?) in this matter….’who will guard the guardians’ indeed.

mind you i’ve had a very jaundiced view of the horsemen for a very very long time….i’ve always felt the upper echelon were on the pad.

By: john begley

john begley — Sun, 18 May 2008 20:17:57 +0000

and anyway…taking one’s oath is a mere formality….or should be for righteous people.

By: john begley

john begley — Sun, 18 May 2008 03:27:15 +0000

i do love that ‘CHRC’s Prevention Initiatives and Liaison Branch” phrase….whatever can THAT be…?

and i do believe they think(as soldiers in the superduper-K man Panzergrenadiers) that their psyops was on the up and up….whomever gave them the thumbs up on that mistaken notion ?

By: Revnant Dream

Revnant Dream — Sat, 17 May 2008 23:11:47 +0000

Good job of uncovering how much deeper this swamp of corruption is. To have the police involved just upped the ante to a darker dimension. To lie about it right up front , maybe under oath. Terrifying! Do we now have a Gestapo in this Nation?

Frankly it doesn’t surprise me in any way, the desecration of this Dominion is quite plain even to idiots. The neo-totalitarians or Trudopians have had 40 years of boring into our institutions like termites. Eating away at our liberties while we slept.

This creature has to sink faster than a dino in a tar pit, or where in for a new level of hell for this Country as this inquisition fuses with the police, with the power of the State.

No one will be safe from the meddlers or con artists.

By: The LS from SK

The LS from SK — Sat, 17 May 2008 21:12:48 +0000

Was Harvey (another recipient of a CJC award)under “Oath” or was he under “the influence”?

By: Rose

Rose — Sat, 17 May 2008 01:16:23 +0000

Under Canada’s Privacy Laws are the various police agencies allowed to legally hand evidence they’ve collected investigating a “Criminal Complaint” to the HRC?

I do not believe that legally they are, if no criminal prosecution takes place why are various Police Agencies handing over evidence to the HRCs to persecute individuals under Section 13? I know this has happened in the past, but will it continue in the future? If I’ve committed no crime why are various police agencies allowed to give the HRCs access to my personal PROPERTY and evidence they’ve collect based on a complaint filed by the nations most “Offended Complainant” who files a criminal complaint and then the police issue a warrent to gather evidence of “Hate Crimes” only to have the police not pursue the complaint yet they hand over evidence to the HRC. How is this legal? The police don’t file a criminal charge against me yet the evidence they collect appears as evidence at the HRC? It’s time for an inguiry against Harvey WallBanger, or what ever his name is. I refuse to learn how to spell his name it would give him legitimacy that I’m not willing to give this two bit piece of @###$$.

Okay I actually typed SHIT.

By: Blazingcatfur

Blazingcatfur — Fri, 16 May 2008 23:00:11 +0000

Cheezus I even found Dawg unequivocably stating in the comments at Damian Penny’s that the CHRC is NOT granted access to CPIC.

If this is indeed true then a complaint must be filed with the Privacy Commission.

Jay in your capacity as Internet Scold it is incumbent upon you to act on the behalf of all freedom loving CHRC haters.

By: Simon Fleischmann

Simon Fleischmann — Fri, 16 May 2008 18:54:49 +0000

Proposed new idiom to be used at every possible juncture:

“As Canadian as corruption…”

and the alternative…

“As Canadian as repression…”

Anyone care to finesse a few more “typically Canadian” idioms for the 21st Century?

Sad, isn’t it?

By: DCardno

DCardno — Fri, 16 May 2008 17:57:54 +0000

So why is Harvey even mentioning better access? bcf, I read that differently (unless there are other e-mails that I have not seen: I'm just a beer-and-popcorn oberserver, not an in the trenches grappler like some of you). It seems to me that the quoted e-mail was not from Harvey, but from [redacted] to a group of [redacted] people that included Harvey - he was not pushing for better access to CPIC (etc), but he damned well knew that someone else was. If the initiative never went anywhere it is possible (but in my mind, unlikely) that he had an honest error in recalling the proposal. If there were any kind of further discussions with external agencies (even if fruitless), or if he participated in the internal discussions, then that is a very thin reed. This sort of thing is both politically sensitive and legally questionable (and access to CPIC would give an CHRC staffer a massive woody) - there is no way any ploicy-maker would forget it.

By: DCardno

DCardno — Fri, 16 May 2008 14:48:46 +0000

dcardno, you are a very trusting man, sir.

No, I just forgtot to insert the tag. I was actually going to continue with an offer to sell Mordechai a bridge.