Rob Nicholson Strikes Again; We Should Strike Back

The grounds advanced by the BCCLA in support of its late request to intervene are substantially the same as those advanced by the Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) in support of a similar request. Given the Tribunal’s rejection of the request by the CCF in its ruling of May 16, 2008 (2008 CHRT 17), there does not appear to be a principled basis. (Source)

I see Rob Nicholson does not believe that the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association should have any voice in the debate over free speech in Canada.  It is completely baffling to Rob Nicholson and the Attorney General’s office why an organization that is concerned about the civil liberties of Canadians to advance one of our must fundamental rights, the right to free speech, should have any part to play in challenging the government in the fraudulent practices of the CHRC.

It’s par for the course that Rob Nicholson and the Attorney General’s office, who don’t consider the truth as a defence, should seek to limit debate on this question.  Why should we be surprised?  Autocratic and Dictatorial regimes seldom care about civil liberties.  If they don’t need search warrants, they don’t need citizen organizations getting involved in the messy business of censorship and thought crimes which are, of course, the exclusive domain of the government. 

Never mind the CHRC, what about the Attorney General’s office? What other areas of law do they think that “truth is no defence”?  It seems to me that if we are successful in bringing down the CHRC, the Attorney General’s office needs to be cleaned out too. 

But the problem is not merely isolated to the CHRC and the Attorney General’s office. They are not the only problem in this country.  There are Star Chambers all around us, seeking to shut down free speeech.  Even our universities think free speech should be an “American concept”. 

I think that a focused effort to communicate our outrage would be a very good idea.  We need to put pressure on one particular political point to get our message across instead of scattering our efforts against the whole Conservative Party. We need to focus our shakedown efforts on one point so that it hurts one politician.  That way, we strike the freespeecher fear into all of them. 

I suggest we setup the “Campaign to Defend Free Speech & Defeat Rob Nicholson“. Whatcha y’all think?

3 thoughts on “Rob Nicholson Strikes Again; We Should Strike Back

  1. I’ve sent too many emails to count, plus typed letters – and received nothing for my efforts except the occasional form letter. I agree. The shotgun approach to communications with the CPC hasn’t worked. Since Rob Nicholson has come out to defend the abominations that are today’s HRC’s – he should be the target.

    What’s that cliche? You lie down with dogs, you wake up with HRCs!

  2. An Open Letter to P.M. Harper on Canadian HRCs
    By Stephen J. Gray

    “Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society,” says Stephen Harper, president of the National Citizens’ Coalition. “It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.” ( B.C. Report, magazine article by Terry O’Neill)

    Dear Prime Minister Harper,

    You are quoted as saying the above about human rights commissions (HRCs). If you really believe what you say, then why is your government siding with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) against Canadians? The Attorney General of Canada is listed as an intervenor in a free speech case according to a Canadian Constitution Foundation Letter of April 28, 2008. Here are the intervenors:

    “The Attorney General of Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and B’nai Brith Canada will be intervening in the Lemire case in support of Section 13, arguing that it is a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech.”

    The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) in its letter of April 28, 2008, had this to say about its own potential intervenor status in Lemire, “By intervening in support of the application put forward by Marc Lemire, the CCF would not be endorsing the content of his message, but supporting the rights of all Canadians to say and write whatever they believe, without fear of violating a law such as Section 13, of the Canadian Human Rights Act.” Amen to that! (By the way, I believe the CCF was refused intervenor status. So much for democracy in Canada!)

    I find it strange that you, of all people, who is quoted as saying that human rights commissions are an “an attack on our fundamental freedoms,” would have your government intervening in trying to suppress the Charter right of freedom of expression. We may not like what people say but in the words of Voltaire, “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” (Canada excepted of course.)

    Canadians are fed up with the “totalitarianism” of these non-elected, appointed “scary” dictators in our supposed “democratic” society. Our society has numerous examples of decent, hard working Canadians being dragged before these non-elected, appointed human rights commissions for daring to speak out in supposed “democratic” Canada.

    Here are some examples: Chris Kempling, Scott Brockie, Knights of St. Columbus, Stephen Boissoin, Bishop Henry, Ezra Levant, and others. Now Catholic Insight magazine, the Christian Heritage Party, and MacLean’s magazine are also under the guns of these HRCs. But, what is even worse is that these people have to hire lawyers and pay their own costs, meanwhile their accusers are given a free ride at taxpayers expense.

    I ask you what is going on? People believed when you and your government came to power that a “new broom sweeps clean” as the saying goes. Instead this does not appear to be the case. Your government is acting strangely. For instance: A Lifesite news article of February 12, 2008, by John-Henry Westen had this to say about the Conservative government’s stand on Human Rights Commissions: “Internal Memo Tells Canada’s Conservative MPs to be Noncommittal on Human Rights Commissions: Specifies that Conservative MPs are not to stand up publicly for freedom of speech for Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant.”

    The article stated, “An internal memo to Conservative MPs sent last week will be sure to disappoint freedom-loving Canadians. The memo, confirmed by as legitimate, originated from the office of the Minister of Justice Rob Nicholson. The ‘talking points’ memo directs Conservative MPs to remain noncommittal on support for Liberal MP Keith Martin’s motion M-446, which would put an end to the growing and dangerous abuse of human rights commissions….”(see full article at:

    These HRCs have become a weapon to suppress and oppress the people of Canada. Yet, a “conservative” government is an intervenor against free speech. Here is more evidence:

    “Sitting in the front row, beside the CHRC lawyer, was a lawyer representing the Minister of Justice, and she was not there to observe. Indeed, she was working with the CHRC lawyer in an attempt to shut down the questioning of the CHRC employees by the defense team.” (Connie Fournier in her article at:

    Where will this all end, I ask you? Will you allow this continued harassment and suppression of free speech and use Canadians’ own taxpayers’ dollars against them? Or will you show your much-published and vaunted “leadership” and “accountability” by demolishing this rotten system of appointed interrogators? Freedom loving Canadians await your response.

    Stephen J. Gray
    May 25, 2008. website:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
20 − 3 =