Most interesting bit of the interview is Nelly says the Post blew the original story: her wifi was NOT unsecured. Makes the notion of CHRC employees wardriving, and THEN using some kind of James Bond technology to break her secure connection, all the more ridiculous.
All when they could have just gone to CoffeeTime.
Ah - blaming the Victim now are we?
Easy to solve it.
Join all in demanding an RCMP investigation.
Not to hard and then it is not my expert is better than your expert and my Dad is bigger than your Dad.
"Blaming the victim"???? All that is being said is that Ezra misrepresented the facts again. It is NOT a fact that the CHRC did what he claims. It is only an allegation that is being investigated by the privacy commisioner. It's that simple really.
bigcitylib nailed it. Now we're dealing with a secured wi-fi? Give me a break! Time to put Buckets on the job, I say. This story is getting more surreal by the minute.
Hmmmm. So we have uncontradicted testimony that the account Jadewarr was operating from Ms. Hechme's router. And we have testimony that the merry band of CHRC investigators and, apparently, the CHRC's complainant poster boy had access to this account.
So far nothing here but the facts.
Now, is this criminal? Hacking a secured connection is criminal. Wardriving an unsecured connection is criminal as well. Both are possible allegations based on the facts in hand.
But, propose for a moment, that the threshold of criminal behaviour is not crossed. Or that Ms. Hechme for whatever reason decides not to press charges.
Is this sort of behavior acceptable on the part of the state? Do you really want a bunch of bureaucrats arrogating the right to post filth from citizens' wifi hot spots?
This matter needs to be investigated - by the privacy commissioner and the RCMP. But, more importantly, it needs to be investigated as part of a full scale judicial investigation into the practices of the CHRC's hate crimes investigation unit.
Dawg, you have been part of the Witness program looking at police action in demonstrations. I applaud that work and the motivation which inspires it. The state must be watched and its powers kept in strict check lest it infringe on our rights and freedoms. The CHRC has been revealed to be, time after time, contemptuous of those rights and freedoms. We need a judicial investigation to find out just how far these thugs have ignored the basic laws of Canada.
And we need it right now.
Jay:
If you are asking whether hacking or theft of unsecured wi-fi by the state should be countenanced, obviously not. Your gigantic leap over the Grand Canyon, though, is to assume that the CHRC did this. Evidence, please.
Seems to me quite clear that Mordechai's post got it essentially correct. Put aside all the BS and hot air, these still remain allegations. These allegations are being investigated. But no one has proven anything yet. That Ezra would lead readers to believe otherwise is pretty inappropriate, I agree.
Dawg, allegations of criminal activity have been made. And admissions of unscrupulous activity and grotesque procedural irregularity have also been made.
From the go my position is that the CHRC s. 13 investigators and management past and present should be subject to a judicial investigation. If there are canyons seperating the investigators from Jadewarr let's hear about them. And let's hear about how it is possible for a complainant to access the investigator's computers and casually substitute evidence in mid hearing.
OT, G. Vigna is now suing Levant. Represented Warman (I believe) at a couple of hearings.
Jay, all these allegations have essentially come from two really stupid Neo Nazis. The police and privacy commissioner are all investigating, but we know they will find nothing, right?
bcL,
The facts are in the transcript of Warman v. Lemire as well as in the SIRC report.
If Lemire, warman or Kinsella are neo-nazis (Stormfront members), marxist - leninists (ARA) or KKK- let the facts and the RCMP sort it out!
Commenting by HaloScan
