Cover Up? Nah -Privacy Commission “clears” CHRC over Wifi HiJack -Bizarre ruling – We uh, really weren’t uh, lookin for anythin ya know what I mean…

This goes beyond a whitewash, this is a cover-up – well it could be if it weren’t so screwed up, what else could explain this bizarre ruling? You can’t technically have a cover-up if you weren’t investigating anything to begin with. After a soothing bath I have realized that I expected too much, clearly I have misunderstood the nature and scope of the commissions enquiry – silly me.

This whole mess obviously exceeds, if not the limits of the privacy commissions mandate, then certainly their guts and integrity. They chose the path of least resistance and investigated “nothing” The findings are here, do note, the language is pure bureacratese and often barely coherent.

This is cute…

Technological experts have indicated that, most likely, but without certainty, the association of the complainant’s IP address to the CHRC was simply a mismatch on the part of a third party, which could have occurred in a variety of ways not involving the CHRC. –

But as a Privacy Commission spokesman stated – the HOW of the hi-jack wasn’t “our focus”.

“During the hearings, Dean Steacy, an investigator for the rights commission, admitted using the pseudonym “Jadewarr” to post messages on white supremacist websites.

Following a subpoena, Bell Canada revealed that a “Jadewarr” post in a chat room had originated from an Internet address belonging to Hechme, who expressed dismay at the notion her wireless connection had been used. The decision by the privacy commissioner still leaves unanswered how Hechme’s Internet account became snared in the rights-commission’s investigation.”

“As for how this could have happened, this wasn’t our focus,” Lawton said.

Hmmm this follow up article casts further light on the uh “impartiality” of the proceedings.

Woman gives up quest for answers to alleged Internet hijacking

Nelly Hechme said she had encountered “too many roadblocks” in trying to get answers about the apparent hijacking of her wireless connection.

Conclusion: The wifi issue will likely never be proven conclusively one way or the other unless a dedicated enquiry is launched. Marc Lemire insists that additional corroborating evidence exists but that the privacy commission denied his requests to submit this information – some 200 pages of documentation – on the basis of, well privacy.If I receive permission I will print his refutation.

Bear in mind that the Privacy Commission did not investigate the “how” of the wifi allegations. The Privacy commission chose to hear only one side of the story – that of their fellow bureaucrats – also known as the accused. We have no idea who they used as experts or what evidence was used to reach their conclusion or for that matter why they wished to comment on a matter that as stated by a spokesman – “… wasn’t our focus?”

So to recap our story to date: A Bell Security Expert testified, under oath, that the IP address in question was connected to the subject of the privacy commission enquiry. At the same time the IP was in use access to the Stormfront website was made by CHRC staff. The allegation was made that the IP in question was the same as used by the CHRC staffers accessing the Stormfront web site.

CHRC staff among others present, made printouts of certain pages of the Stormfront site and submitted these as evidence at a CHRT hearing. Access was gained to the Stormfront site, during this incident, using a pseudonym/login now known to have been employed by CHRC “Secret Agent Provacteurs”. This login information also appeared on a certain document which is related to allegations of evidence tampering by CHRC staff. The basis to support these allegations are statements made by CHRC staff and others during cross-examination under oath during testimony at CHRT hearings.

The transcript testimony indicates that a CHRC “investigator” – a man known to be blind to justice, common sense, and virtually everything else, a CHRC lawyer with very good reason to feel less than serene, and a maladjusted litigious third party misfit referred to as “Lucy” were present when the documents were printed, these documents were used in a switch of evidence. Access to Stormfront on the date and time the documents were printed was gained using the login of Jadewarr – an “undercover” identity known only to and used only by CHRC staff at that time…hmmmm.

Sorry not buying this as the end at all. A judicial enquiry is desperately needed, based on the transcript testimony the CHRC Cultists have proven they cannot be trusted.

Oh and Jennifer Lynch QC has issued another priceless press release.

The Commission will carry on its work in all areas of discrimination, including hate on the Internet, pursuant to the responsibilities conferred on it by the Canadian Human Rights Act. “There remains a need to protect Canadians from hate messages in the Internet age. Our investigators will continue to work as required by the Commission’s mandate and the law to prevent people from spreading hatred in our society,” explained Ms. Lynch.

Jenny you are so full of SHIT. But I do appreciate the continued patronage of your minions.