1984 Has Arrived!

So I must say that my faith in municipal politics was somewhat restored last Tuesday night while I was in attendance of the Carleton Place Town Council meeting.  On the agenda for the meeting was a response to the letter that we sent to The Mayor and Town Council last month.  The letter was a response to information that we received in preparation for the upcoming Tribunal hearing on December 1.  According to this information, the man who is accusing my parents of discrimination was never charged his dog’s license fee by the Town of Carleton Place based on the claim that it was a service dog.

In the letter to the Town, we once again verified that this man’s dog did not meet the requirements for a service dog according to the town by-law and we asked that the Town collect “from [this man], the fee required for any other citizen to pay for the privilege of having a dog as a pet.”  We also requested that “The Town of Carleton Place take steps to effectively help every business that has been put through the ringer dealing with [said man] and his unsubstantiated Human Rights claims against their businesses because said businesses were following the rules and regulations put in place by both the Town of Carleton Place and the Health Unit of Lanark County.”  Initially the agenda for the meeting made a cut and dry point to dismiss the concerns that we had presented but thankfully common sense kicked in with a couple of the councillors who were already aware of the actions this man has taken against several local businesses.

We would like to thank councillors Antonakis, Flynn, and Burns as well as Mayor Dulmage who showed the most support for our current situation.  It was a huge relief to see local politicians show such strong opinions in our favour.  While the council decided to move their decision on this specific matter until after the Tribunal Hearing, some shared plans to make an appearance at the hearing.

During the meeting, Mayor Dulmage also proposed a motion that the Town send out a letter to all local doctors asking them to be more cautious when writing prescriptions concerning service dogs.  The motion was carried by Town Council and we wait to hear further on their future decisions regarding this situation.

Ghost Town: A once thriving town that has been completely abandoned.

It has been brought to my attention that this blog is currently the topic of discussion on the Carleton Place Forum.  Some of you agree with me and some of you don’t.  Either way I appreciate the discussion and attention that this matter is receiving.  For those of you who think that I am overly anti-HRC, I completely understand your point of view.  One such Carleton Place citizen who commented within the forum commented “Do we really think we’ve beaten racism?” (This person did make other points and as I’ve encouraged people to do before I welcome you to read what others have to say.)  My answer to this particular question is an emphatic “No”!  I do not think that we have beaten racism.  I’m well aware that we haven’t.  However, I’m a realist not an idealist and to be perfectly honest, we will never beat racism.  The prejudice or preference of one race over another is a frame of mind.  It begins as a thought which develops into a belief and unless we resort to a system that practices thorough brainwashing techniques there is no way that we will ever be able to eliminate racism.  This isn’t to say that we should allow open displays of hatred in public, but people will think what they want to think.  The most we can hope for as a collective society is to educate people to the best of our abilities and hope that they make a well rounded decision.  The original purpose of the Human Rights Commission was to give all people equal rights.  As it stands, we have that and it is protected under the law.  My issue with the HRC is that they have become a ruthless corporation in that their purpose has been fulfilled yet there is too much money made for them to shut down the organization.  Human Rights is no longer a cause, it’s an industry.  For those who would say that we already pay for it so why stop now, I’d like to point out that just as any other multi-million dollar corporation, the HRC has more control than we could actually know.  For that matter I believe they have more control than they could really know themselves.

In the case of my parents and the local citizen who isn’t content unless he is causing trouble for others, it is not unreasonable to believe that this case will set a precedent for the town of Carleton Place.  A decision in favour of either side will have far reaching results.  If it were to be ruled in favour of my parents and confirm that they were not discriminatory then it will hopefully be used to assist others who have had similar complaints filed against them by this man.  However, if the HRC were to determine in favour of this local idiot (my opinion only) then the consequences could be huge, not only for us but also for other businesses in town.

First problem: He has the demented idea that he can use whatever disabilities he may have to force people to bend to his every whim.  THIS IS NOT THE WAY THE WORLD WORKS! In no way, shape, or form should this man’s behaviour and treatment of people be tolerated.  For those who think that his vile behaviour is limited only to business owners, a Carleton Place resident recently informed me of a personal run-in she had with this man.  This particular person was taking several packages to the IDA to have them mailed and when she got to the door this man was in front of her.  Since she realized he wasn’t going to hold the door for her, she politely asked him if he could push the automatic door boor button for her.  Instead of being helpful, he turned around, looked her up and down and simply said “You don’t look disabled to me!”  Then he proceeded to walk inside pulling the door closed behind him leaving her to fumble with the door while attempting to not drop her many parcels.  This man completely lacks any sense of social courtesy.  He is out for himself to get what he can and the HRC is enabling him to continue with this.

Second problem: In Carleton Place, there are approximately forty different food based services between restaurants, food stores and coffee shops.  They are ALL expected to abide by the health code.  Basically, this means that there are currently about forty local businesses that are vulnerable to this man’s actions should he choose to take any against them.  If he were to slowly and meticulously take his time to fine each one that stands up to him, it is not unreasonable to suggest that these locally owned and operated businesses would go under, one at a time, on account of bankruptcy.  The HRC can implement a maximum fine of $25,000 for each case like our’s.  You would be hard pressed to find a local business owner who can stand to lose that amount of money.  If the HRC were to rule in favour of this man in the case of my parents, they will have set a precedent that allows him to do as he pleases in similar cases.

Third problem: This case also has the potential to set a precedent for other people who are looking for similar sorts of compensation.  As other residents can attest, this man has been seen without his dog, which would indicate that he does not need it to the standard that he has claimed.  I personally have also witnessed this man tell adults “Careful, don’t pet him, he bites.” (Which service dogs are trained not to do but that is beside my current point).  In a matter of moments, I have then seen him turn to a child and encourage them to pet the animal!  Now, I have my own ideas of what this means but I will leave the possible ramifications up to your imaginations.

This is not an isolated issue.  The ruling in this case will not only effect one family, but it also has the potential to effect the entire town.  There are already people who refuse to go to restaurants where this man is often served with his dog in tow.  Especially considering the fact that he holds the dog at table top level and quite often feeds him from his plate.  Although they are making the choice to serve him, what other options are they left with?  Also, restaurants increase business and a lack of these services in a small town can effect the overall business itself.  In these economic times are we willing to take that risk?  The town office itself has given this man more ammunition to use against people.  They have not charged him for his dog’s license on the simple claim that he refers to it as a service dog and they have put into place a by-law that gives no clear definition on what animals are permitted into food based services.  The numerous enabling factors have given this man more than he needs to bring an entire town to its knees.  Whether or not you agree with my views on the HRC itself is up to you.  However, it is time for people to stand up to this man and confront the powers that be who have allowed this nonsense to continue this far.

*For those who are interested in knowing more about what the town has to say on this matter and whether or not they will implement a plan of action, are welcome to attend the next Town Council meeting.  It is beeing held on Tuesday, Noevember 3, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. at the Carleton Place Town Hall.  Unforunately we cannot say exactly what time this issue will be discussed at.*

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” – George Orwell

Here is what you don’t want to hear. “Human Rights” is an abandoned cause.  The organization is a farce.  In Canada, the Human Rights Commission has become not much more than a coddling station for the whiny, crestfallen, pampered, troublemaking citizens whose feelings have been hurt!  I don’t know about the rest of you but as a child I was no stranger to the bullying game.  In fact, I remember one year while attending summer camp, there was a group of kids who decided to name me “Jello”.  After the first day it would change based on the colour of t-shirt I was wearing.  “Turqoise Jello” was really creative guys.  Was it disappointing?  Of course it was.  Nobody likes to be criticized or torn down, even when they know that there is merit in the criticism.  Now don’t get me wrong, there is no way in hell that I am pro-bullying, but I do believe that from every experience there is some sort of lesson to be learned.  In the case of being bullied, I learned over time to stand up for myself and dish it out as I got it.  It’s truly surprising how many people can’t handle both sides of this game.  As I got older I began to make fun of people along with myself.  It was mostly a way to break the ice but it also became sort of a private, personal mission to prove to people that in order to get through the day, sometimes you just have to be able to laugh at yourself.  Sometimes this backfires… people don’t like to be made fun of.  However, sometimes it just takes time for people to understand the point.  All this to say, anybody can learn from a difficult situation.  If you don’t like what is happening to you or around you, then change the circumstances.  Catching people off guard is quite often a good way to make them stop and think.

Now, apart from my twisted sense of humour, the above is pretty much common knowledge.  However, people have adopted the idea that going through life without having their feelings hurt is a “right” and so fills up the inbox of the Human Rights Commission.  In order to figure out whether or not the HRC efforts are being misguided, it would first help to determine what exactly a “human right” is.  Basically, it is any basic right or freedom that all humans are entitled to.  It also means something that the government cannot interfere with.  We all have the right to personal freedom for ourselves and our thoughts and speech.  We all have the right to suitable living conditions and we also all maintain the right to equality in the eyes of the law.  Now obviously these basic statements branch out into more detailed explanations but it’s pretty understandable.  Nowhere has it ever been determined that everybody has the right to go through life without being criticized or teased.  If this is the case, then we better get HRC employees out there monitoring recess time!  People criticize, it sucks, but it is their right, just as it is the right of someone to respond to that criticism.

Now if you were to ask Barbara Hall, former Toronto mayor and current Chief Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, she would and has claimed that the number of complaints made by Ontarians each year seems incredibly low based on it’s size and multicultural backround.  She has also made it known that she feels the HRC does not have enough power.  Ummm… perhaps we should re-name Orwell’s Big Brother for Big Sister!  It is the 21st century after all… women can aspire to be fascist dictators too!!  The suggestion of political correctness has become an unofficial law that is consistently being enforced by the HRC.  God forbid we maintain our right to develop and share an opinion.  Denying people the right to think for themselves is one step before removing the right to vote.  I’m quite certain that if the HRC had their way, voting for certain parties would soon become a convictional offense.

So I sound like a conspiracy theorist, right?  Perhaps I do, but think of this.  Every police force has someone to answer to.  They are monitored in their actions by an Internal Affairs Bureau.  The Government itself answers to the people.  If we don’t like what they do, we vote them out as soon as we can.  One would naturally assume that the inner workings of the HRC are also monitored.  It’s sickeningly shocking to think that they might not be.  They aren’t!  Personally, the second I read this information, my stomach lurched to the point where I was literally left speechless.  I re-read the information several times over in an attempt to make sure my reading skills hadn’t failed me!  When I was certain that I hadn’t misread, I refused to believe it and my own search for the information on who monitors the HRC resulted in nothing.  It’s because it is simply not there!  The HRC has won!  They have fulfilled their purpose.  However, as any good intent can be corrupted, this one has been too.  The HRC is a multi-million dollar national industry!  Well tobacco farming was once a prominent industry too but since the Smoke-Free Canada campaign was started these farms have become no longer essential.  Instead, they are subsidized for other purposes.  Why should the same not happen with the Human Rights Commission?

We live in an intolerably tolerable country where you will find radical religious fanatics who believe in the degredation of women, working hand in hand with extreme feminists who feel as though they have something to prove!  We already KNOW that everybody is equal, we already KNOW that all religions are welcome to practice, we already KNOW that everybody has a right to live freely from discrimination and we already KNOW that having a uterus does not make someone unsuitable for a formerly testicular dominated profession!  We KNOW all these things and for the most part we PRACTICE them.  The HRC is like a dentist yelling at you over your shoulder to brush your teeth while you are in the midst of doing so!  Like every guardianship position there is a time to cut the apron strings and let people use what you have taught them.  Insisting your 40 year old child hold your hand while crossing the streets just doesn’t make sense!  Perhaps the money that is spent on HRC could be re-directed to provide lower cost legal action for the legitimate cases that do reach the HRC.  It would truly be better for all involved because for the real cases that do get the attention of the HRC, they are being ignored and extended in order to pay more heed to the cases that would be laughed out of the average courtroom.

This particular post has no specific references to the case of my parents but I have come to consider it important for all to hear.  You may not like it but there it is!  If you’re like me, you’ll want to find your own information to see if it coincides… PLEASE DO!  Take the time and look into this for yourselves.  It would be foolish to think that any person is able to completely avoid the HRC and their increasing power.  If they continue to exert this power, everybody is a possible victim because the HRC is becoming an organization that prides itself on placating the spoiled brats of society who are really just needing a dose of reality.

As I mentioned before, my purpose in these posts is to provide education and information.  Unfortunately, I am not an expert and I feel like a teacher who is learning along with their students.  The best I have been able to do is read whatever information I can get my hands on and so far the most helpful thing I have come across is the book Shakedown by Ezra Levant.  If you have not read this book I STRONGLY encourage you to!  It gives a thorough look into the inner workings of Human Rights in Canada.  As I read his book and learn more about specific cases that they have ruled on and how their decisions are made I find myself hoping that the whole thing is false and that at the very end I’m going to find the sentence “Hahaha… GOTCHA!”  Well… I’ve already read the last page… it doesn’t happen.

Here are some issues that most concern me based on what I have read and what I have experienced throughout the proceedings of this case with my parents.

My first conlusion is that not only do these human rights “advocates” seem to consider the respondents guilty before anything can be proved, but it is as though we are set up to fail from the very beginning.  Trying to get clarification or any sort of solid answer from these people is like trying to pull cobra teeth!  For example, last week I spoke to somebody from Human Rights on behalf of my parents and in the 45 minute phone conversation, I asked the representative if he could please clarify a certain section of the CHRA in order for me to better understand it.  His response was “I’m not authorized to give legal advice.”  This bit continued on for a while with my insisting that I was not seeking legal advice but merely an explanation.  Finally I asked who I could speak to that would be able to clarify things for me.  I was told to consult a lawyer.  Silly me – the dumb, outspoken, country girl – for assuming that someone working for Human Rights would be able to interpret the Human Rights Act for me.  No… in order for that to happen you have to consult with a lawyer.  Then there is the question of “What if I can’t afford a lawyer but I make too much money to qualify for Legal Aid?”  According to Human Rights… tough luck!  After hanging up the phone because I was making no headway, I’m pretty sure I went through the five stages of acceptance in a matter of about 30 seconds.  Basically, Human Rights representatives refuse to clarify or interpret the very law they are meant to be enforcing!  The only way you can get this clarified is to speak with a lawyer.  Well in my opinion, when you have to speak to a lawyer to understand your own rights and those of others, then people had better start handing out legal retainers at baby showers because pretty soon we’ll all need a lawyer just to take a shit!  The whole thing sounds like a joke doesn’t it?  Well… it is.  Human Rights is nothing more than one big punchline!

Now despite my own frustrations in dealing with Human Rights, I’ve learned some very interesting things while reading Shakedown.  From what I have read thus far, I have come to my own conclusion that Human Rights and its employees are above the law.  They don’t defend the law, they don’t enforce the law.  They use the law as inspiration for their own artistic and outrageous depictions.  I’m pretty sure Picasso used inspiration and look how that turned out!  An interpretation of something doesn’t really make it anything like the original.

From reading about different cases I’ve discovered that these people…

1) Don’t even necessarily have a background in law.  Many have no legal training whatsoever.  – Ummm I think I’m going to go ask my Chiropractor what stocks he thinks I should invest in!

2) Don’t even have to find you guilty of something in order to convict you!  If someone presiding over a hearing determines that the intent may have been there… well you’re screwed.  – I’m going to go discipline the dog down the street because, although he wasn’t actually barking, the intent may have been there!

3) Are given no outline by which to make their decisions.  It is left up to the individual presiding to come up with a conclusion based on what they think. – Well I’m sorry but the Common Sense Express just left Human Rights Station and not a single damned one jumped on board!

4) Openly make exceptions in favour of the applicant.  When approaching a Tribunal Hearing there is a guideline to be filed in the matter of delivering documents to the other party.  When my parents failed to receive anything from the applicant by the last due date (the one that cannot be missed by any means, according to those in charge) the only response we got was “Unrepresented parties aren’t always very sophisticated with our timelines so we’ll give him some more time.”  – If you were ever the kid in school who worked their ass off to get that mega essay written and handed in on time only to find out that the teacher gave your idiotic classmates an extention… you’ll understand the feeling.

5) The pick on people who don’t fight back!  Not because they don’t want to… it’s because they can’t afford it and they are ultimately powerless to stop it.  Average people like you and me are the brunt of the Human Rights attack because we don’t have the attention of the rest of the country at our disposal.  – Were we not all taught that bullying is wrong?

In short, the Human Rights representatives are nothing more than a group of self-righteous bastards posing as legal avengers.  They are out to prove that they still have a legitimate purpose when really their purpose has long been fulfilled.  I mean, for the millions of dollars they rake in from the government each year, I’d be trying to make it look like I work real hard too!

If you’ve told yourself up until this point that this is “just the way things are”, think of the fact that this is your tax dollars at work.  Everytime a representative refuses to answer a question or they decide someone is guilty but still go through the charade of scheduling a hearing then you might as well flush a $5 bill down the toilet because it’s essentially the same thing.  These are people who have deemed themselves as personal saviours to the downtrodden and deserted members of society but in reality their nothing more than active enablers, pimping out “human rights” to make a quick buck while simultaneously oiling the squeaky wheels of our nation!

Ok so a couple of you have had the chance to respond to the first post and in these responses you make a lot of sense.  Yes you would think that any business has the right to refuse service, especially in the event that the person they are refusing to serve is acting in an agressive and abusive manner.  This isn’t just speculation… it is actually outlined and stated as fact in the Canadian Human Rights Act.  Under Section 15 of the CHRA it states that it is not a discriminatory practice if someone working in and a goods and services establishment refuses to provide service in the even that “accommodation of the needs of the individual or a class of individuals affected w0uld impose under hardship on the person who would have to accommodate those needs, considering health, safety, and cost.”

There you have it in a proverbial nutshell folks!  This section doesn’t say that you can only refuse to serve someone based on this information as long as they have nothing for you to discriminate against… it clearly states that if you feel that you will be caused “undue hardship” in serving someone no matter their race, sex, religion, mental state, clothing style or hockey team preference… YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SERVE THEM!  Now again, as I said before, I’m not even close to being a lawyer but after reviewing this section of the CHRA it seems pretty obvious what its intentions are.
So now to better understand the story a little bit more we have two sides.  I realize that I’m biased for the simple fact that I’m the offspring of the Respondents but as I suspect that since you all have an I.Q. level of at least 4 points or higher you will understand the titles I have given these two parties.  On one side we have The Hardworking Law-Abiders.  A couple who spent eight years building a business that was once in a state of despair and turned it into a huge success.  Just to be clear, when I say “huge success”, I don’t mean that they all of a sudden became millionaires but they definitely have earned the right to bask in the light of success for taking a suffering business that was on the brink of losing and turning it into something that could not only support itself, but also the owners and their family.  They worked together full time (consisting of on average 80 hour work weeks) to build this store from the rubble up!  It took time, money, sweat and determination… but they did it!  Now, owning a business that is a food based service, they also had to be fairly familiar with the Health Code.  Unfortunately this is not Europe or Asia.  I wouldn’t outright deny that perhaps Canada is a little over-cautious and over-zealous when it comes to certain health specifications.  However, for a country that provides free health care can you really blame them?  In Canada, you cannot bring a pet into a food based business (such as a restaurant, bar, or food store) except for a single exception.  If the animal is a working animal then of course it is permitted access.  The reason being, true service animals are trained in what is called “public access manners”.  This means that the animal (most commonly a dog) is trained to stay at its handler’s side and to not wander around the place without a working intention.  Again… no problem!  My parents were well aware of this allowance of service animals in their place of business.  In fact they even has regular customers that had service dogs of some sort with them.  In the event that a health inspector were to walk in and see one of these dogs, the inspector could ask for identification for the animal to prove its legitimacy and once all is said and done everything is hunky dorey!  However, if a person were to enter the store with what they claim is a service dog and they are not able to provide identification to prove its legitimacy, this same health inspector can fine – not the owner of the animal – but the owner of the store.  Hmmm… so I wonder why a couple working 160 hours a week between the two of them just to keep their business running would be cautious about such rules….

Now we have the other side.  This man is what I’m going to refer as The Municipal Terrorist.  Yes, I’m aware that this is not a politically correct term and if Big Brother catches up with me I’ll be completely honest, I couldn’t care less!  Now I know that some of you will be thinking “Terrorist seems a little bit extreme to me…”  Well my response to you is that extreme behaviour earns an extreme title.  As I mentioned in my previous post, my parents are not the first people to be attacked by this particular man and we have realized that unless something significant is done, they will not be the last.  This man has moved from business to business flaunting his pet while referring to it as a service dog and just desperately waiting for someone to stand up to him so that he can cry discrimination!  The instances that I will provide you with have occurred in no particular order.  He has sued a waitress who told him that he had to take his dog outside after she caught him feeding the dog over the buffet table while he served his plate.  I’m sorry, but as we all know, dogs routinely lick their own asses!  It’s their alternative to toilet paper!  A lot of dogs also drop things several times when they are eating and the fact that this occurred OVER a buffet table is disgusting!  Don’t get me wrong, I love dogs but I don’t want to eat from the same source it does!  This man has also tried to charge a local bar with discrimination when they told him that he could not be served after the owner caught him allowing the dog’s paws on the bar!  Now I realize that a bar isn’t quite a food source but think of the possible chain of events… dog steps in poop, dog puts paws on bar, poop bacteria gets transferred to the bar, hardworking average Joe comes to the same bar after work and rests his hands on the bar while he orders a beer which he later orders wings to have with it!  Poop on dogs feet goes from ground, to bar, to hands, to mouth.  Average Joe can become sick and the bar can get fined!  This is all in the realm of possibility!  Now these are only cases where people working in the industry have stood up to him.  There are of course others who let things slide as long as it doesn’t happen again.  Like the restaurant that told this man he could keep the dog inside as long as it stayed at his feet.  There is also the pub that he was told to leave immediately when he set his dog on a family’s table because he wanted to show it to the children.  Then there is the other bar that immediately demands he leave anytime he shows up after already having consumed a few drinks.  So then we get to an important question… why have none of these businesses come forward now?  Why have they not charged this man officially?  Why will nobody speak UP?  The answer is simply fear.  This man has used his “disability” and his “service dog” to create fear and havoc amongst local food businesses.  They won’t stand up because they too are afraid that his spidey senses will release a sticky HRC web on them and they’ll be stuck in a pointless and possibly damaging situation of “being guilty” and having to defend themselves repeatedly while this man carefully selects his next target.  His power is to instill fear.  It is his only tool and the most powerful someone could have at their disposal.  This is why I will refer to him as a terrorist.  He has moved through a town and instilled fear in a group of people who are just trying to make a living and he forces them into uncomfortable situations where they feel inadequate to respond or act.  They become effectively paralyzed to stand up for themselves in a country that promotes equal rights for all individuals.

Go figure…

Ok so to be completely honest I’m really new to the whole blogging phenomenon so I beg you to bear with me while I figure this out.

In exactly 34 days on December 1, 2009, my parents will be heading to a Tribunal Hearing with the Ontario Human Rights Commission.  From what I’ve been able to gather and what the OHRC representatives tell me a Tribunal Hearing is very much like a court case and while I’m not even close to being a lawyer I have a pretty good grasp of reality.  In a court of law there are too parties as there are in an HRC case.  In the case of the HRC, the “Applicant” is the one who files the complaint and the “Respondent(s)” is who is being blamed for something.  In this particular case my parents are the Respondents.

Now before you lose your cool let me just clarify something.  While we ARE a causcasion, lower middle class family, from a small town in the Ottawa Valley I must emphasize that we ARE NOT self righteous, weapon carrying, bigoted, supremicists who hold ritual killings in our backyard in the name of a race pure from variety, disease, or difference of opinion.  So now you’re probably wondering what on Earth we could possibly have done in order to receive a summons from the OHRC?  If the legal avengers of the human rights front have pulled on their loudly coloured tights and capes in order to defend a displaced member of society then we MUST have done something wrong… right?  Well I suppose that question is up for personal interpretation so despite the fears of my parents that the HRC may come after me in an outrage I’m going to give you the facts and let you decide for yourselves.

My parents are being accused of discriminating against a man on account of a disability for not allowing him to bring his Chihuahua (which he claims is a service dog) into the health food store that they previously owned.  Now you have to be wondering “why wouldn’t they let a service dog into their store?”  The answer is, all legitimate service dogs were welcome in the store without question.  Including the Golden Retriever of a cutomer who suffered from a degenerative eye disease by which she progressively lost her sight.  Here is the fact, this Chihuahua is NOT a service dog.  So basically it could be determined that my parents are being targetted for following the law.  According to the Ontario Health Code a food service business cannot allow any animal into their business unless that animal is “working”.  Over the past three years this particular man has had several chances to provide identification and documention to substantiate the claim that his pet is a service dog yet he has still been unable to do so.  This includes one particular occasion on October 6, 2006 when he openly admitted to my father that his dog was not a service dog and could not be a service dog because it did not meet the qualifications for one.  You don’t say!

So now you have to be wondering what kind of “service” a Chihuahua can provide for a person with a disability.  According to his doctor this man suffers from anxiety, depression, and chronic mechanical low back pain.  A quick Google search of Chronic Mechanical Low Back Pain confirms that it is something that approximately 85% of the population will deal with at some point in their lifetime.  I myself have had problems with back pain.  I have also been diagnosed with dysthymia (a mood disorder that is closely related to depression) and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (which is an anxiety disorder).  I find it funny that I have no problem going into a food store or restaurant without the accompaniment of a service animal yet this man cannot.

The date that provoked this man to file a complaint with the OHRC saw him enter the store drunk, holding his dog in his arms and shouting “Are you people going to serve me or what?”  When my father demanded that he leave the store immediately, the man responded with “I am not leaving until I get some f**king service!”  Again my father told him to leave or else the police would be called.  Now pause for a moment and think of yourself behaving in this appalling manner… would you leave or keep it up?  This man now responded with “Go ahead and call the G*d-D*mn police I am not leaving until I get some f**king service!”  Needless to say the police were called while my mother, terrified by what was happening, bagged up the items he wanted, handed them to the man and begged him to leave.  His response was to through a handful of change in an overhand throwing motion at my mother before storming out of the store.

Now I plan to leave this up to you.  What do you think?  Unfortunately, we are at a point in the investigation where we are already decidedly guilty in the eyes of the OHRC who most often rule in favour of the Applicant even if all evidence in the case shows the complaint as preposterous!  Yesterday I finally picked up the book Shakedown by Ezra Levant to gain some better understanding of what is going on and I am truly terrified that my parents are about to be made examples of by the OHRC which in turn denies their right to refuse service in the event that someone enters their store and puts them in a position of undue hardship!  To top this all off… my parents are not the only people who have been targeted by this man.  He has filed complaints or lawsuits against almost every single restaurant or food business in town who has stood up to him.  But I will give you more information on that later…

The HRC which was originally created to defend those who were victims to the travesty of violations to their basic human rights have become the travesty themselves!  They are no longer in the business of defending human rights but rather of exchanging one right for another to prove a point.  I plan to update this as we get closer to the Tribunal hearing and I welcome all comments on what you think or what you would like to further understand.  What do I hope to gain from this?  Education and information.  The best way to understand something is to be educated and informed.  If you asked me last year what I thought of the Human Rights Commission, I would have told you that I think it is a marvelous organization and how lucky we are in Canada to have something to make sure that our basic rights are not denied or infringed on.  Now that I am more informed as to the extreme power that they hold and the dim hope for anyone who gets caught in their web I will personally claim that I think the Human Rights Commission has rendered itself no longer usefull.  The time has come and gone, as it does for every group of activists.  Once the point has been estabilished and the mission has been fulfilled it is time to put away your power until it is truly needed again.  Even the Musketeers disbanded eventually!

In conclusion what I truly hope to gain from this blog is a movement.  A movement of understanding, education, awareness and concern from all Canadian citizens.  In short a movement that is far greater that the one descending from the bowels of the HRC!