Archive | Human Rights Tribunals RSS feed for this section
June 10, 2014

Degenerate sex offender Charles Mzite finds favour with BC Court of Appeal


Charles Mzite is a convicted sex offender. In 2009 his trial on 4 counts of aggravated sexual assault resulted in a conviction and a 10-year prison sentence.

This depraved HIV-positive immigrant from Zimbabwe came to my attention about a year ago when his human rights complaint was tossed by BC Supreme Court Justice Harry Slade.

Mzite deliberately lied to at least 4 women, assured them repeatedly he did NOT have HIV and had sex with them. He successfully infected one of the women with the disease.

As I wrote in September 2013 in my article about the degenerate Charles Mzite:

He repeatedly violated the rights of four women, placing them all under a potential death sentence, and he did so willingly. He gave no thought to the consequences to those women or the catastrophic effect his selfish acts would have on their lives.

He misled and outright lied to these women to convince them he was not HIV-positive, and kept denying it until he was arrested. At that point he finally admitted he knew he was HIV-positive and had known it as far back as 1995.

What an utterly depraved specimen of humanity and a repulsive example of manhood.

That article also contains the full depth and breadth of the depravity of Charles Mzite, taken directly from court records in case you think I’m overstating his crimes.

While Justice Slade tossed Charles Mzite’s human rights complaint and ordered him deported, the BC Court of Appeal it its infinite stupidity just decided Mzite’s 2-year delay in filing his human rights complaint is no big deal and that the 6-month deadline for filing a complaint should not apply to Mzite.

There was some basis in this case for the decision to accept the complaint after the expiry of the six-month period afforded by the [human rights] code,” wrote Justice Peter Willock in the ruling.

It cannot be said that the decision was patently unreasonable. I would allow the appeal, set aside the order made by the judge and remit the substantive complaint for consideration by the tribunal pursuant to the code.

I can find no confirmation that Charles Mzite was ever deported, so presumably Canadian Taxpayers are still on the financial hook for feeding, housing and clothing the degenerate sex offender.

Now, thanks to the BC Court of Appeal and their lack of common sense, we are on the hook for another expensive human rights complaint where the BC Human Rights Tribunal will do what it does best.

They will undoubtedly for the complainant, hand him a massive cash settlement and leave his 4 sexual assault victims wondering why they even bothered to come forward to prosecute Charles Mzite for his heinous crimes.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

May 25, 2014

BC Human Rights Tribunal’s Latest Bizarre Decision

Patti Props liked this post

I call the decision awarding 55 tree planters over $600,000 bizarre not because it is wrong (for a change) but because they value the “dignity and self-respect” of black African workers so much less than a single white wannabe doctor.

In the case of Balikama obo others v. Khaira Enterprises and others, 2014 BCHRT 107 there were real, substantial and ongoing human rights abuses, unlike the case of Carl Kelly, which I wrote about last week.

Carl as learning issues and ADHD, making it hard for him to cut it in medical school. UBC made significant and ongoing attempts to help Carl, yet according to the BC Human Rights Tribunal the university did not go anywhere near far enough in their accommodations of Carl Kelly and his pre-existing disabilities.

As I wrote last week:

Carl Kelly, after almost 2 full years, failed to complete his first year of training, including his first paediatrics rotation. In the words of the ruling, he failed. The word unsuitable could easily be used in place of failed, won’t you agree?

Extending Carl Kelly’s family medicine rotation over twice its normal duration seems like one heck of an accommodation to me. Moving him from his assigned rural training location to Vancouver seems like another. These say to me that UBC wanted Carl Kelly to succeed and made great strides to see that he did, even though his performance continued to be poor.

BC’s Human Rights Tribunal awarded Carl Kelly $75,000 just for the “injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect” he suffered. The total award in Carl’s case is $475,000… to a single individual.

In the case of 55 black African tree planters who were racially taunted, refused food, paid at the whim of Khaira Enterprises’ owners and in one case sexually harassed, this same BC Human Rights Tribunal saw fit to award only $10,000 to each individual for the “injury to their dignity and self-respect.

Maybe these same black Africans ought to file a human rights complaint against the BC Human Rights Tribunal itself, given the gross disproportionality of awards for black vs. white complainants in these two cases.

Now that’s a tribunal hearing I’d buy tickets to watch!


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

May 23, 2014

B.C. Human Rights Tribunal Utterly Disconnected From Reality… Again.


In an astounding display of the bureaucratic disconnect from reality B.C. Human Rights Tribunal member Enid Marion awarded $475,000 in damages, including a whopping $75,000 specifically for “injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect“, to University of British Columbia (UBC) medical student Carl Kelly.

This is ludicrous. It’s beyond ludicrous, actually. It’s utterly asinine.

Carl Kelly, as specified in the ruling Kelly v. UBC (No. 3), 2012 BCHRT 32, has

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder – Inattentive Type (“ADHD”). He also has a Non-Verbal Learning Disability (“NVLD”) and has, at times, suffered from anxiety and depression.

On August 29, 2007 UBC determined Carl Kelly was not suited to being a doctor and terminated his enrollment in its medical program.

Carl Kelly immediately filed a human rights complaint, since a “life-long desire” to be a doctor is a “human right’, right? Well, this is British Columbia and as B.C. Human Rights Tribunal member Enid Marion made crystal clear in her ruling,

“I have considered that I can accept some, all or none of the evidence of a witness.”

In other words Enid Marion can decide anything she wants for any reason and discount any evidence before her, for any reason.

Nice… but let me get back to the issue before us.

Not every person is suited to the career of their choosing. That may be sad, but that’s life.

If you unable to learn the material required and fail to perform adequately in your medical rotations even after accommodations are made specifically for you, it is reasonable to draw the conclusion that you are “unsuitable” to be a doctor.

That sucks when your “life-long passion” is to be a doctor, but that’s life. Unless, of course, you file a human rights complaint in British Columbia. Then the harsh realities of life mean very little.

The facts of this case include the following:

Dr. Carl Kelly entered the FM Program in November 2005 in the rural program. His start was delayed to accord with his graduation from the Undergraduate Medical Program at the University of Alberta (“U of A”).

Dr. Kelly was dismissed from the FM Program on the basis of unsuitability in August 2007 having only partially completed PGY 1 (Post Graduate Year 1).

Dr. Kelly’s first rotation was a paediatrics rotation in Kelowna. This rotation usually consists of two blocks (each block being 4 weeks). Dr. Kelly was only scheduled for six and one half weeks of training in this rotation due to his late start in the program. His performance was rated “fail.”

Carl Kelly, after almost 2 full years, failed to complete his first year of training, including his first paediatrics rotation, albeit a shortened rotation due to his own late start. In the words of the ruling, he failed.

The word unsuitable could easily be used in place of failed, won’t you agree?

Dr. Kelly was then scheduled for two blocks of family medicine at the UBC clinic in Vancouver. This rotation was extended to almost five blocks.

Extending Carl Kelly’s family medicine rotation over twice its normal duration seems like one heck of an accommodation to me. Moving him from his assigned rural training location of Kelowna to Vancouver seems like another. These accommodations tell me UBC wanted Carl Kelly to succeed and made great strides to see that he did, even though his performance continued to be poor.

In January 2006 Dr. Kelly’s preceptors raised concerns about his performance which were discussed at a Site Directors meeting.

Around this time, Dr. Kelly’s Director of his Residency Program, Dr. Carl Whiteside, advised Dr. Kelly that he had not passed his first rotation in paediatrics at Kelowna General Hospital. Dr. Whiteside discussed with Dr. Kelly undertaking his training in Vancouver so that he could access a more structured learning environment.

Dr. Whiteside suggested Dr. Kelly see Dr. Mike Myers, a psychiatrist with a speciality treating physicians. Finally, Dr. Whiteside requested an assessment of any difficulties Dr. Kelly experienced during medical school so that accommodation of Dr. Kelly could be considered in the FM Program. Dr. Kelly gave his consent for Dr. Robert Drebit, from the U of A, to release this information to the FM Program.

By March 2006 the Site Directors had determined that Dr. Kelly was not suitable for continued training in the rural program. This decision was based on learning styles observed by the rural preceptors in Kelowna and by preceptors in the UBC Clinic. At a meeting of the urban Site Directors on March 15, 2006 the Site directors considered these observations. The Site Directors determined:

a. that Dr. Kelly would remediate his paediatrics rotation;
b. that Dr. Kelly’s new site Director, Dr. Betty Calam would ask Dr. Garey Mazowita to act as a mentor for Dr. Kelly;
c. that Dr. Kelly would be attached to the incoming PGY 1 group for St. Paul’s Hospital as of July 1, 2006, if he successfully remediated his paediatric rotation;
d. that Dr. Kelly could return to the UBC Health Clinic for his family medicine rotation in his PGY2 year; and
e. that Dr. Kelly would follow a “vertical” structure for rotations, using both St. Paul’s and the Greater Vancouver programs, rather than the horizontal model at St. Paul’s.

On April 5, 2006 Dr. Kernahan met with Dr. Kelly and Dr. Newton, Clinic Director at the UBC Health Clinic, to discuss certain issues that had arisen regarding his conduct during the rotation. These included a prescription he had signed and complaints from a member of the faculty, Dr. Donlevy, regarding Dr. Kelly’s on call conduct. During that meeting Dr. Kernahan formed a concern regarding Dr. Kelly’s behaviour when Dr. Kelly left the room saying he was “going to be sick”.

Dr. Kelly was advised that he had still not passed the UBC Health Clinic rotation and that his rotation at the UBC Health Clinic would be further extended before he would begin his remedial rotation. He was also advised that he could provide his response to the two incidents discussed.

On April 27, 2006, Dr. Kernahan spoke with Dr. Simi Khangura regarding the structure of Dr. Kelly’s remediation. She advised that Dr. Kelly had not been functioning at the level of PGY 1 Family Medicine Resident in his previous rotation. Drs. Kernahan and Khangura discussed an evaluation model of providing daily feedback forms to Dr. Kelly at the end of each shift so that Dr. Kelly would get immediate feedback from each of his supervisors daily.

He failed his initial paediatrics rotation at UBC’s Medical School. After almost 5 blocks of family medicine rotation Carl Kelly still hadn’t passed that rotation. Even after UBC assigned him a mentor and created a special structure within the medical program designed specifically to fit his needs Carl Kelly continued to “under-perform”.

UBC continued to make changes to the program specifically to accommodate Carl Kelly.

On July 26, 2006, Dr. Calam spoke with Dr. Myers regarding a consultant for neuro-psychological testing for Dr. Kelly.

Also on July 26, 2006, Dr. Calam wrote to Dr. Myers and asked for an opinion outlining any restrictions for health reasons that Dr. Myers thought might be necessary for Dr. Kelly for his next rotation, scheduled at CTU at SPH for July 31, 2006, for four weeks. Dr. Myers provided same that day advising that, “Dr. Kelly is at risk for irritability, inner frustration and disorganization when he gets especially busy or tired.”

On July 28, 2006, Dr. Kernahan concluded that Dr. Kason’s evaluation did not amount to a pass.

From July 31 to August 27, 2006, Dr. Kelly undertook a rotation in CTU – Internal Medicine (General). Dr. Kelly’s performance was assessed as a “pass”.

From August 28, 2006 to September 24, 2006 Dr. Kelly undertook a rotation in emergency medicine and was assessed as “pass”.

On September 14, 2006 Dr. Calam received a complaint from some of the residents in Dr. Kelly’s peer group about an e-mail he had circulated the previous month. Dr. Calam suggested that Dr. Kelly be relieved from his current rotation pending investigation.

As a result of his poor progress in the medical program and the email message UBC’s doctoral supervisors placed Carl Kelly on “educational leave”.

During this time of educational leave Carl Kelly went to his union to complain about his status and Ms. Zoe Towle, a representative of PAR-BC, intervened on his behalf.

In March 2007 Ms. Towle advised that on Dr. Kelly’s behalf PAR-BC would seek a second opinion from Dr. Margaret Weiss, a psychiatrist specializing in adult ADHD, to obtain information regarding potential accommodation of his learning disabilities and of his suitability for residency training.

Clearly Mr. Kelly felt UBC failed to accommodate his learning disabilities, even though they already made numerous, repeated and ongoing concessions for him. Due to his performance during his medical rotations, or more specifically his lack of performance during them, Carl Kelly was dismissed from UBC’s medical program.

In August 2007 the Resident Performance Subcommittee (“RPS”) of the PGEC met to consider Dr. Kelly’s suitability for continued training in the FM Program. On or about August 23, 2007 the PGEC recommended that the Complainant be terminated from the FM Program on the basis of unsuitability.

While it is sad and unfortunate, not everyone is cut out for the job of their dreams. That is one of the harsh realities of life here on Planet Earth.

Carl Kelly’s “life-long passion” is to be a doctor. Passion is great, but passion alone does not automatically qualify one for a job. You must also have skills, knowledge and aptitude, among other prerequisites.

I, for example, have a lifelong passion to be an astronaut and walk on the surface of Mars. Does that mean I have the aptitude, skills and physical attributes required to be an astronaut? Does that mean I’m entitled to a massive payout when I fail to meet those qualifications?

Absolutely not.

Unless, perhaps, I file a human rights complaint in BC and am fortunate enough to land Enid Marion as my Tribunal member! Then the odds are surely in my favour!

You see, Enid Marion of the BC Human Rights Commission felt UBC failed Carl Kelly and discriminated against him personally.

It’s hogwash, but Enid Marion gets to make that decision, not me. I am left with the sole option of praying UBC appeals this absurd financial award.

Justifying this absurd monetary award for which every British Columbia Taxpayer will now pay, Enid Marion said this:

[101] My reasons for this are as follows:

b) I do not accept UBC’s argument that it is not principled to conclude that a person with a life-long passion suffers more than someone without such a passion when they experience discrimination. In this case, it is relevant and principled to consider that Dr. Kelly was pursuing an almost life-long desire to become a physician and that the loss of that opportunity had a serious and detrimental impact on him, particularly within the context of his family dynamics.

c) Dr. Kelly suffered deep humiliation and embarrassment as a result of the discrimination, which was ongoing for a significant period of time. He experienced symptoms of depression, including a lack of interest in life, trouble sleeping, and other health-related problems. I accept his evidence about the depth and continuing nature of those symptoms, including his thoughts of “ending it”, from the date of his termination in 2007 until his reinstatement to the Program in 2013, including his loss of self-identity and self-esteem, his feelings of worthlessness, and his despair and uncertainty about his future.

d) Dr. Kelly experienced further embarrassment when applying for jobs and explaining why, with his educational background, he was not pursuing his medical career.

e) Dr. Kelly lost his source of income and felt compelled to move back in with his parents, losing his independence.

[102] I find that the particular circumstances of this case are unique and serious. Unlike Gichuru, Dr. Kelly was unable to complete his training and enter practice as a physician as a result of the discrimination.

[103] In all the circumstances, I am persuaded that an award of $75,000 is reasonably proportionate to the injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect suffered by Dr. Kelly. I order UBC to pay to Dr. Kelly the sum of $75,000 damages for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect.

I’m sure Carl Kelly is a very nice man. That does not bestow upon him the right to the career of his choosing. Like the rest of us, he must find the career he is best suited for, even if that ultimately is not one for which he has a “life-long passion”.

Can a person with ADHD be a doctor? Absolutely. As evidence of experts quoted in this ruling makes clear, such people are successful doctors, lawyers and entrepreneurs, among other careers.

Does that mean that every person with ADHD can be a doctor.

Of course not.

“Life-long passion” does not equal aptitude, ability or skill. Such is the harsh reality of life, unless you file a human rights complaint in British Columbia.

UBC made numerous and ongoing attempts to accommodate Carl Kelly’s ADHD and learning disabilities before terminating him from its medical program. When those additional efforts did not result in Carl Kelly passing his extended medical rotations UBC is held at fault by the BC Human Rights Tribunal, not Carl Kelly.

He was first reinstated to UBC’s medical program and then rewarded for failing to pass his medical rotations to the tune of $475,000.

That is absurd.

That is the BC Human Rights Commission.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

May 10, 2014

Are you offended by something I said?

Ryan Steacy, Mike Ackermann liked this post

The problem with some folks is they can’t accept the fact an opinion exists of which they don’t approve. Freedom of speech is okay but only if you agree with their opinions.  The problem with politicians is they feel compelled to pander to the people who cannot accept another’s point of view.

Combine the two (incessant whiners and politicians) and you get nightmares like the Canadian Human Rights Act and Section 318 of the Criminal Code, both of which create special status for “special” people, leaving the rest of us mere citizens out in the cold.

Not only are we left out in the cold, we now have the full weight of government to contend with any time we say something one of the protected class of whiners doesn’t like.

Shockingly, one isn’t required to be a member of a protected class in order to file a complaint on their behalf. ‘I’m outraged for you’ appears to be the operational basis here, and a very profitable one for some.

Try saying anything outside of the mainstream politically-correct view about any of the following folks and you will quickly discover the error of believing you actually have a Right to Freedom of Speech:

“any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.”

As in George Orwell’s Animal Farm, some pigs are truly more equal than others.

White heterosexual Christian males need not apply, however. You are NOT one of the “protected classes” of people despite having an actual religion, sexuality and race. Put another way, you’re not quite as equal as others.

Am I saying every member of these protected groups is a whiner? Of course not. I blame gutless politicians for pandering to special interest groups more than I do those lobbying on their behalf.

To live is to offend someone, somewhere along the way. Do we really need a group of bureaucratic thugs to beat us into submission simply because our view of the world is different than theirs?

Here in Canada the answer is a resounding YES!

Ask Marc Lemire, Connie Fournier or Arthur Topham. Each of these individuals suffered the crushing weight of bureaucratic excess, and often for sentiments they never even wrote.

Marc Lemire faces a lifetime free speech ban for an article posted on his website. He didn’t write the article. He didn’t even post the article himself, yet the screaming banshees at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal consider him more of a threat to the “Canadian way of life” than… well pretty much any violent criminal.

To date the Canadian people have wasted over a quarter million dollars prosecuting Marc Lemire… and for what? An article he didn’t even write that was read by perhaps 10 people worldwide?

Connie Fourier finally shuttered after being found guilty of defamation of serial human rights complainant Richard Warman. The final straw for Ms. Fournier was the condition she be held liable for any negative comments made by anyone, at any time in the future, about Richard Warman.

That ruling’s phrasing would even allow Richard Warman, for example, to log onto and post something negative about himself and still trigger the full weight of the law on Ms. Fournier. It’s utterly absurd for Connie Fournier to he beld accountable for the comments of another, yet that’s now the law of the land here in Canada.

Arthur Topham wrote something about someone or some group of someones that offended another someone who complained to both the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the RCMP. Arthur Topham now faces charges under both the Canadian Human Rights Act and Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Nobody will tell Topham what he wrote that was so offensive. Instead they demand he defend everything he ever wrote from six months before his arrest until… well.. whenever he might finally get his day in court. That’s right. Every word Mr. Topham writes until his trial can and will be used by Crown prosecutors to show what a heinous threat he is to both the Canadian Way of Life and The World as We Know It.

Yeah, there’s justice for you!

While I would hope our Canadian skins are thick enough to tolerate offensiveness in others… apparently we can only tolerate our own offensiveness. That our attitudes may actually offend others is completely missed in the rush to fend off some perceived slight.

Like Stephen Fry so bluntly said, if you’re offended by what I say, “…so fucking what?”

Get over yourself already.

Dismantle every so-called “human rights” tribunal and commission across Canada. If they were ever needed (I doubt it) their “best before” date expired long ago and are now simply vehicles for punishing those with whom we disagree.

Abusing our fellow citizen is not a “Canadian value” simply because we disagree with what he or she says.

Or at least it shouldn’t be.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

October 4, 2012

Systemic Racism inside Thunder Bay Police Services? Sure looks that way from the outside.


In our Digital Age it”s very easy to screw up.  Never more so than when [allegedly] racist Thunder Bay Police Services (TBPS) Detective John Read writes an offensive “joke” press release about the murder of Adam Yellowhead with the headline “Fresh Breath Killer Captured!!!” and then sends it out to hundreds of media outlets by “mistake”.

To quote the headline from a Globe and Mail Editorial, “Thunder Bay Police don’t understand why joking about an aboriginal murder victim is grotesque

 A 65-year-old native man, Adam Yellowhead, was found dead – murdered – in an area frequented by people who drink mouthwash to become drunk. The lead investigator for the Thunder Bay Police Service wrote a fake press release about arresting a suspected killer, intended only for the eyes of his fellow police officers. “Fresh breath killer captured!!!” But then the investigator mistakenly sent out the fake release. Oops.

Oops is an understatement!

That’s not a mistake, that’s downright offensive. I don’t care what race you are.

What’s even more offensive is the response of both Thunder Bay Police Services Chief J.P. Levesque, Police executive officer Chris Adams and Thunder Bay Mayor Keith Hobbs, who is also a member of the Thunder Bay Police Services Board.

Mayor Hobbs had the audacity to say response to the offensive email was completely “blown out of proportion.”  He went on to tell CBC Radio,

That was… uh… a joke made between detectives and it should stay in-house.  It’s got nothing to do with race, and I think for the media to make it into a racial issue is totally irresponsible.

Chris Adams said the Human Rights Complaint was “insulting” to the Thunder Bay Police Services.  Now that’s rich.

“We’re discouraged by the announcement of the complaint,” Adams said.

No doubt.  Nobody likes being called racist on the world stage.  There is a very simple remedy for that, of course… don’t act like racists!

Other words bandied about by TBPS Chief Levesque, Chris Adams and Mayor Hobbs were “insulted” and “disappointed“.

No, “insulted” is how the family of murder victim Adam Yellowhead feel.  Get it right.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

June 29, 2012

Ezra Levant’s 5-Point Plan to eradicate the Canadian Broadcasting Standards Council and Section 5 of the Canadian Television Broadcasting Regulations


On the June 18, 2012 edition of The Source, host Ezra Levant put forward his 5-point plan to rid Canada of the Canadian Censors Council, or as they like to call themselves, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC).

As I wrote last week, membership in the CBSC is 100% voluntary. If you do NOT want a television broadcast license, you have no need to “volunteer” to join the CBSC.  However, if you actually want to create a broadcast television channel then there is nothing voluntary about it.  You must join or your application will be denied.

Once you voluntarily join the CBSC you are required to abide by its Code of Ethics.

Ezra Levant was found guilty of violating Clause 6 of the CBSC Code of Ethics by the Canadian Broadcast Censors Board.

That clause reads as follows:

Clause 6 – Full, Fair and Proper Presentation

It is recognized that the full, fair and proper presentation of news, opinion, comment and editorial is the prime and fundamental responsibility of each broadcaster. This principle shall apply to all radio and television programming, whether it relates to news, public affairs, magazine, talk, call-in, interview or other broadcasting formats in which news, opinion, comment or editorial may be expressed by broadcaster employees, their invited guests or callers.

The problem is not that Levant violated this section; it’s that he actually exceeded its requirement and disclosed the full and complete facts about the Chiquita Banana corporation and their long history of paying off terrorists in order to produce their crops in third-world nations.

That was considered impolite by the censors, or as they prefer to be known, “impartial adjudicators” and they decided they needed to make Ezra Levant shut up.

Now, am I really saying these people specifically have it in for Levant and Sun TV?

No, I’m not.

What I’m saying is they are using the system put in place 30 years ago to their advantage.  That’s just human nature.  That’s also why the system needs to be changed, to be stripped of the power to censor someone simply for expressing an opinion they, the censors, don’t like.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

October 17, 2011

Hypocrisy Reigns Supreme at Ontario Human Rights Commission

Ontario Human Rights Commission

I’ve always believed the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) is nothing if not useless, stupid and unnecessary.  Today I add “hypocritical” to the list of adjectives used to describe this anti-freedom, anti-private property government thugocracy.

Earlier in the year the OHRC was bored and started paging through the classified ads sections of Ontario newspapers, combing them for people who were clearly violating OHRC guidelines.  Naturally, since they make up the rules as they go along, they were able to find dozens and dozens of violators.

It’s easy to find offenders when the rules are anything you say they are, right?

Take, for example, a homeowner advertising a room or apartment for rent that says “Perfect apartment for a student”.

While any normal, sane and rational person would comprehend instantly that this isn’t for them if they’re a family of 4, the Ontario Human Rights Morons class such common sense advertising as “age discrimination.”

I wish I could say I was making this crap up.  THAT at least would be believable, unlike the moronic rulings coming out of the OHRC.

Here is the official list of what these complete and utter morons list in their page “What is Discrimination in Rental Housing?


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

August 5, 2011

Saskatchewan dumps its Human Rights Tribunal. That’s 1 down, 13 to go…


Saskatchewan has officially dumped its Human Rights Tribunal.  What a momentous day for our cherished Rights and Freedoms!   This is the day we’ve been anticipating since Saskatchewan’s Justice Minister Don Morgan announced the proposal about a year and a half ago.

Anyone who hasn’t been hiding under a rock for the past 5 years will know all about such stellar examples of Human Rights Tribunals in action as the Ezra Levant case, where he was put through a 900-day kangaroo court process before the lunatics running the Alberta Asylum finally came to their senses and dropped the case.

Just the other day I was fascinated to read that Ezra Levant’s book, Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights about his ordeal with Alberta’s Human Rights Tribunal, won Best Political Book of the Past 25 Years.

Exra Levant: ShakedownKudos to Ezra, not only for not caving in to the demands of this anti-freedom government agency, but for his staunch and public defense of both himself and our Right to Freedom of Speech.  He deserves a lot of credit for the seeming demise of these tribunals across Canada.

Where some are not actually being disbanded yet, they are widely being shown for the joke that they are.  In British Columbia, for example, the latest round of idiocy from the BC Human Rights morons was to fine a comedian for dealing with a lesbian heckler who was making out wth her girlfriend in the front row of the establishment where he was performing.

Truth, of course, is no defense in these Tribunals, and these unaccountable judicial wannabes are the sole arbiters of what defense a person will be allowed to enter, if any.

I had a great time watching Ezra on Sun TV yesterday as he discussed the award and what he thought about why the message of his book resonated so deeply with Canadians.

Freedom of Speech needs great defenders, and Ezra Levant is definitely one of those.  We’re lucky to have him.

If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

June 24, 2011

Guy Earle appeals BC Human Rights Tribunal discrimination decision


On April 20th, 2011 Guy Earl was found guilty of “hurting the feelings” of lesbian Lorna Pardy, who had the audacity to claim she suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result.  Pardy obviously has some pretty big balls, making such an absurd claim.

The BC Human Rights Tribunal showed just how ridiculous and out of touch with the real world they are when they made this ruling.

Thankfully Guy Earle has decided to appeal this asinine decision.  I applaud him and his decision.

He’s filed his appeal with the BC Supreme Court, alleging the Tribunal’s moronic decision violated his Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression, as does its Human Rights Code.

Amen Brother!

As I wrote when the BC Human Rights Tribunal’s moronic decision was released,

Believe it or not people… gay, straight, or whatever… and contrary to the moronic ruling in Pardy v Earle (April 20, 2011 Decision — 107 pages), “being offended” is not a violation of your Human Rights.

I read through the entire United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and guess what… it’s not there.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

May 10, 2011

Tim Hudak bails on pledge to kill Human Rights Tribunals

Tim Hudak, the winner of the Ontario Progressive Conservative leadership race, is now backtracking on his pledge to get rid of Ontario’s Human Rights Tribunals (HRT).

It’s a decision that’s pissed off a lot of conservative people, especially those who helped get him elected as leader based on his position on the HRTs.

Hudak made some very strong comments about how he would get rid of Ontario’s Human Rights Tribunals in a post on his website:

Turncoat Tim Hudak flip-flops on his promise to scrap Ontario

Don’t bother trying to read his post though… in the wake of becoming party leader Hudak has sanitized his website of anything that might be used to hold him accountable.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

Go To Top
Get Adobe Flash player