We happen to agree with Joseph on this one. If the CHRC wasn’t in the papers and blogs so much these days, or if Mark Steyn was named Joe Blow, or if Maclean’s was named Macnobody’s, it’s doubtful they wouldn’t have heard the case. As for his assertion of “inappropriate” pressure, well…that’s life, bud.
End result: the commission is worried about their rep and their ass more than they’re worried about their self-styled mandate. And that, too, is nothing new.
[Faisal Joseph] “Based on the Investigator’s findings a hearing was warranted to allow evidence to be presented and arguments to be made,” continued Joseph. “However we are not surprised at the decision in light of the inappropriate political pressure that has been brought to bear on the Commission and that has prompted the Commission to set up an internal review of its procedures under s. 13(1).”
[Commission’s finding] (A)n argument could be made that the material in the complaint bears some of the hallmarks of hate as identified in the Kouba decision, that it does portray persons of the Muslim faith in a negative light based upon broad generalizations, and therefore may expose persons of the Muslim faith to hatred or contempt.