From Ezra Levant's blogpost about the Canadian Jewish Congress's belief in the competance of Human Rights Commissioners:
I wonder how that admission will affect the CJC's case before the Canadian Human Rights Commission right now. The CJC is an intervenor. If they're conceding that the CHRC is incompetent, isn't that legally relevant? Has that incompetence affected their investigation and prosecution of the CJC's own case?Two problems with Ezra's statement:
1. At what point of studying and being involved in hearings in Human Rights Commissions has Ezra ever been led to believe that "legally relevent" matters one whelp to these people?
2. CJC never conceeded the CHRC is incompetant, one of their "senior members" stated so off the record. Ezra's been a lawyer long enough to know that the legal opinion of an organization is only cocked up in a meeting with a recorded vote, not based on the comments of any member of the board (no matter how senior).
