Now that we are mopping up after the disgraceful Human Rights Tribunal hearings were hastily abandoned by our opposition - at least for the time being - I want to summarize a few more thoughts that have been clarified in people's minds as they have watched this travesty upon the face of Canada that shamelessly declares that "Truth is no defense!" and "Truth is irrelevant!"
Man, have they shot themselves once more in the Unspeakable!
Probably the best way to express what happened last week is to remember B'nai Brith representative Ellen Kachuck's words as early as February 8, 1985, who was quoted in the Toronto Globe and Mail as being far from pleased with the progress of the then ongoing trial against Ernst Zundel - for much the same he is "on trial" - again!
Said Kachuck, speaking for the tribe: "I think it was a much messier affair than we expected it to be in terms of things coming out we didn't want."
And so it was - again! If political dissidents and politically incorrect folks get dumped on morning, noon and night under the hypocritical and ever more threadbare guise of "human rights", there is bound to be a backlash where decent people say: "We, too, have a story to tell - and you won't like what we are going to reveal."
The questionable role of Reva Devins, who ought to have known better as a Harvard-trained lawyer than to double up as "judge" of Mr. Zundel when all the while she knew, or should have known! what had been stated in her name as a Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission about a man and his actions of whom and of which she knew little about - is merely the tip of the iceberg.
There will still be eventually the (much-feared?) Judicial Review where she and others will be under scrutiny by a court of higher jurisdiction for the way they ruled and conducted themselves in the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hearings pertaining to, of all things, a USA-based website! We all understand that this parasitic enterprise that pays a substantial per diem to its minions ***needs to have politically incorrect people's reputations ruined to justify its own existence***, but other folks not in our camp are waking up to what is going on.
For instance, there is this article by Rory Leishman of the London Free Press of June 8, 1998, titled "Gay pride decision ominous". I quote from it selectively:
"Last Monday was a dark day for democracy in the city of London. After a three-year battle with the Ontario Human Rights Commission, most members of city council simply gave up their rights as elected representatives of the people of London by agreeing under pressure to issue a Gay Pride proclamation.
"Granted, some councillors . . . support the London Pride '98 proclamation in principle. They think it's wrong to refuse to issue a proclamation on behalf of gays, lesbians and bisexuals.
"How far are these tolerant councillors willing to go? Would they have the city issue a pride proclamation upon request by the adulterers of London?
"If not, why not? What is so different in principle between a proud adulterer and a professed bisexual? (...)
"(I)t's apparent from the outcome of last fall's mayoral election that the great majority of London voters are unwilling to have the city issue a pride proclamation which at least implicitly declares that the practice of homosexuality or bisexuality constitutes a safe and legitimate alternative lifestyle.
". . . it's evident that deputy Mayor Anne Marie DeCicco, Coun. Ben Veel and some others on council who support the London Pride '98 proclamation have simply caved in under pressure from the Ontario Human Rights Commission.
"Granted, that pressure was considerable: Anyone who defies a lawful order by an Ontario Human Rights Tribunal is liable to a maximum fine of up to $25,000 and could end up in jail as a prisoner of conscience.
"What does it say for democracy when presumptuous judges and autocratic human rights adjudicators dictate to elected representatives of the people how they must vote on a hotly contested issue of public policy like a Gay Pride proclamation?
"This alarming development does not just impinge upon London councillors. It threatens federal, provincial and municipal legislators throughout the country."
So you see what these "politically correct" hatchet and enforcer organizations called "Human Rights Commissions" are doing? They are forcing upon Canada - and, of course, other countries who let themselves be cowed that way - a certain political agenda against which sovereign citizens can only protest at the enormous costs of enormously time-consuming, expensive, no-win, "truth is not a defence" hearings and bankrupting penalties - not only in money, but freedom as well.
Will people take that lying down? These Thoughtcrime Cops have more to worry about than gagging a genuine human rights activist like Ernst Zundel because his editorials - legitimate in print! - are being posted on the Net.
I want to quote a ZGram reader who grasps precisely what is going on:
"The silent majority, who have lately allowed themselves to be lassoed and dragged around by the intolerant minority, show signs (of resentment) . . . at being led around by the nose."
Just think about where, for instance, Tribunal member Reva Devins finds herself: She will have the Human Rights Commission thumb screws put on her to stay the course and stick it out - at the expense of ***her*** career and reputation!
If she were smart and strong, she would back out, admitting that she made a monumental booboo. If she thinks with the tribe - and well she might, since she has done that now for years! - this matter will go to Judicial Review.
And who is to say what will be revealed - the next round?
More and more people realize the Industry of Hate is now on trial in the court of public opinion - and it is NOT the Zundel-Haus.
Ingrid
Thought for the Day:
"The socialism of liberals and the abject corporatism of conservatives are creating a political vacuum in a time of discontent when the perception is growing that the kind of life Americans traditionally believe they and their children are entitled to have is being destroyed.
"Vacuums, in such circumstances, can be dangerous."
(Charley Reese)