First: Are our nation’s human rights tribunals a thought-crime police? You bet they are. Nowhere else can you be found guilty for doing something completely legal, but supposedly with prohibited intentions. In refusing to dismiss another “I didn’t get appointed faculty dean” case, this time at UBC, the BCHRT says that it must put the parties through a full hearing in order to probe the minds of the respondents for prohibited thoughts:
I am of the view that, only after a full hearing, is it possible to determine whether the Committee’s process was tainted by prohibited motivations.
Second: The lawfare campaign of three doctors against the University of Ottawa has intensified, now that a staggering $150-million lawsuit against the university has been disclosed. Even though the Ontario Human Rights Code prohibits the hearing of matters that are currently before the courts, the OHRT is dilly-dallying around and refusing to dismiss the human rights complaint outright. Note that the three complainants haven’t withdrawn their complaint either, even though this lawsuit was filed back in October.
Third: Not specifically regarding the HRCs, but Bruce Bawer at FrontPageMag.com discusses how Reporters Without Borders does indeed have a border. Their latest press freedom rankings seems remarkably oblivious to state repression of criticism of Islam. In fact, it could even be said that RWB appears to reward countries that haul blasphemers into the courtroom, for example the Netherlands’ ranking skyrocketed while Geert Wilders was on trial. Concludes Bawer:
It’s hard not to get the impression that Reporters Sans Frontières grades threats to freedom of expression based on what, exactly, the threatened authors and journalists in question have done to give rise to the threats.
Fourth: What every potential human rights complainant needs to hear:
Grow up and move on.
Fifth: Looks like Hamilton is getting the Barbara Hall treatment: Hand over your zoning authority to me, now!