Jennifer Lynch CHRC Kommissar says: "velocity" of Free-Speech debate "took us all by surprise" - among other out of touch musings
Rights commission to review Internet hate laws
Don Butler , Canwest News Service
Lynch played down the controversy stirred up by the Maclean's complaints or the ensuing parliamentary manoeuvres as triggers for the review.
"We've been working on this for a long time internally," she said, adding she identified it as an issue last summer, soon after taking over as chief commissioner. But you just like to hide your light under a bushel huh Jen;)
That said, she conceded that the "velocity" of the public debate "took all of us by surprise. It's clear the public want to have the debate. Our job really is to animate and lead on the debate." Uh huh so that's why you appoint a fellow traveller in Richard Moon to conduct your rubber-stamp inquiry.
Lynch said she isn't "the least bit concerned" that the current law blurs the lines between hate speech and speech that is merely offensive. We know that's why we want you and your Liberal Fascist friends put out of business.
So far, she pointed out, there have been no rulings that water down free expression. Uhm , not to put too fine a point on it, actually they all do Jenny.
It's conceivable that legislative changes may not be necessary, Lynch said. About as conceivable as the possibilty of you ever receiving another public appointment.
The Human Rights Act allows the commission to draft binding guidelines - similar to statutory regulations - that can set out the application of the act.
"We have learned how to work within our legislative mandate and modernize," she said. And let's not forget how your staff has impressed with their ability to work outside the law.
"If it's possible to do so, it's more practical not to have legislative amendments, because that takes a long time to do." Jenny says "Law is Hard!"
In a brief interview Tuesday, Moon said the public debate over the Maclean's complaints is evidence that such a review is needed.
"I don't think anybody could pretend that there isn't a serious issue to be considered here." Ok I'm not touchin this one.
At this point, he said, he is "reading comprehensively" and will meet privately with people on all sides of the issue to hear their perspectives.
He doesn't plan to accept written briefs or hold public hearings.
Hmm I wonder who he'll actually meet? Barb Hall, The CJC, Farber, Adler, Richard Warman, Dean Steacy. God forbid he actually has to speak with the "public".
The rest.
Maybe what the CHRC folks mean by "public" is the Irish public, those one can keep asking till the public get the answer right. Or not, as the case may be, in which case one can declare the public is dead and the issue is resolved without need of further discussion.
I just had an illegal dream. It was awesome, and graphic. It used 1000 colours for one cherished word.
A bald eagle was screeching, "What's in a name?" "What's in a name?" "What's in a name?"
Another eagle held red, red roses in its talons, and their petals were falling into a black, black hole.
A third eagle was preparing another noose.
[With thanks to Shakespeare and other traditions]
I kind of believe Lynch when she says she has been planning this for a year; because the kind of study and obfuscation message she is spinning won't serve well at this point in the game - it really is a stand that could only be taken seriously a year ago - but is likely to be taken cynically by most observers today.
Would anyone like to have some tea with that bullsh*t?
Four Horses
Coffee Service FH, Jennifer is Kommissar of the Coffee Service!
I find all this disingenuous press scrumming by the CHRC's official drama queen to be very insulting to the media or anyone who has followed HRC doings.
Lynch should be challenged when she goes into all this baffle gab about redefining hate speech and offensive talk and bla bla bal.
..this was all done for them in the Taylor ruling...they have their definition right from the SCC and for the past number of years section 13(1) CHRC prosecutions have strained or arbitrarily reinterpreted that definition...the SCC stated that going beyond their rendered definition would be unconstitutional infringement of charter free expression...they breeched that rendered definition and willingly started all the intrusive jurisdiction creep that has caused the controversy today.
It is precisely because the CHRC has strayed from the SCC defined limits that this shit storm has occured...Now she's obviously running a damage control smoke screen with this BS redundant report..which will NOT justify why the CHRC strayed from the hate speech definitions given them by the SCC to arbitrarily prosecute "common offensive" speech as opposed to true criminally intended hate speech.
What pisses me off the most about this is no media hack challenging her on this.
.
That is a good point WLMR no one has directly confronted her with the facts of that decision.
Clearly, BCF has it right. Lynch is COMPLETELY stoned on something. She doesn't even seem TENTATIVELY GLUED to the surface of sidereal reality.
I preferred it when surrealism was confined to the borders of Dali canvasses, didn't you?
BTW, I like the T-shirt my wife wears, which reads:
JENNIFER LYNCH
IS
OUT-TO-LUNCH
My dearest ALSO has Kommandant Lynch's office telephone number in 48-point type underneath the message. It got quite a few comments last weekend as we drove the 1000 Islands Parkway to attend a wedding in Montreal.
>>